Innovation

[Chad Seibel 2]

If you don't shoot you don't score.

True, but you don't score if you don't hit the net.

(for the record, I think the greatest innovations can come out of the biggest mistakes)

[sdcopp 1]

The unfortunate side of things though is you have to be in a position to make the mistakes to be able to learn from them and drive towards something better. Smaller/Newer brands do not have that luxury, you either hit a home run or die if you're a new start-up. That being said though there are plenty of opportunities to learn from others mistakes/shortcomings/outright failures and make something unique and bold that is a home run.

Keith is a perfect example of innovation that had to be well on the right path from the start. Sure there have been tweaks and tuning to the Sprung frames, but without the first big push of something people will adopt he wouldn't be enjoying the cult like following for his product.

Great new products absolutely can come from failures in innovation, and there's almost always good intentions of trying to do something new to advance what is possible. There is the other side of that too that great innovations can evolve into mediocre or even bad products down the line.

[Sprungster 5]

1998.

[sdcopp 1]

Oh I understand that yours has been a long journey Keith, but if the initial offerings to the public that you undoubtedly invested in production of had flopped instead of gained a following where would Sprung as a company be right now? There are plenty of companies that are footnotes in the history of inline hockey gear because when it came time to recoup invested costs they didn't make it very far despite having a big idea.

[Sprungster 5]

Oh I understand that yours has been a long journey Keith, but if the initial offerings to the public that you undoubtedly invested in production of had flopped instead of gained a following where would Sprung as a company be right now? There are plenty of companies that are footnotes in the history of inline hockey gear because when it came time to recoup invested costs they didn't make it very far despite having a big idea.

The prototypes were a tremendeous success. Because of them and the level of people in the industry that thought they were hot shit, we always had feedback from the top on every step. And help in one way or another from all of the companies and players off the top of the deck. By the time we were at the "closeout" model it was not much of a gamble. The roller hockey industry liked it enough and encouraged us enough to keep at it. We and everybody in the industry also new we'd have to have the actual following to force the change. Joe Cook told us straight out. The encouragement and positive feedback from current testing at "name of company" only makes me smile. But you are a smart guy and absolutely right that if they hadn't caught on things would be sucky...and there would be different things to talk about. And a big thanks from all of us equipment junkies to JR and everyone at MSH for providing a place for all of us jaw. The biggest single piece of help we've had. :)

[fatwabbit 93]

If you dont try, you'll never know the difference... outside of hockey, I know people (some in my family) who would say that staying in your home country is the best thing to do, but I would never have enjoyed the current standard of living if I was back home. Sure, there are risks involved, sacrifices to make, but at the end of the day its all your own personal preference.

When the Sprungs thread first started, I was skeptical about the concept. Having skated on hilos for the longest time (venturing to Easton Big Wheel and flat chassis only for a short duration) I hated leaving my 'comfort zone' in terms of skating. I kept trying to get older model skates, never having much knowledge about the fit etc... I never thought that my foot type would be any different from any other persons. Having been on this board for the past 6 years or so, has helped me understand the different fits, different gear, what model works etc... Finally went to sprungs, and never turned back. I did 'stray' a little and go with some vanguards, but that lastest one drop in before I went back to sprungs. I recently went back to my A6s after being on A7s for the past year plus and its like falling for that hot college chick all over again.

Kudos to Keith and the other innovators in this industry... without you guys we would have never known any better. You've made me enjoy more hockey, and become a better player altogether... now all i have to do is to practice my backward crossovers more and I should be sweet...

[Chad Seibel 2]

Good points wabbit, and I agree with them. When we brought out the Hum'er chassis, a lot of people said we were only trying to get around the patent. We brought the Hum'er out because we totally believed in the innovation and we were confident that players would recognize the better system over the HiLo and now we are seeing the results, as in my opinion the Hum'er is the system of choice out there.

OK, OK listen I am not trying to start a little brand argument here. I want to focus on the innovation. From the Tour side, all I am saying is that the Hum'er frame is what a lot of players would choose and even our main competitor, the #1 brand in the market changed the HiLo to mimic the all 80 set up by going to their Vanguard system so we must of innovated things here.

[RevisionHockey 0]

I think the Vanguard change to 80-76, Hummer change to 80mm, and our brand going with the 100mm set up are all in response to providing more speed and grip which are a direct result of bigger wheels. That started a long time ago I believe as the ancient theory originally was small wheels to stay low to the ground. People were skating on 68s back then. So honestly I don't think any of our brands in regards to being the leading innovator on chasis design has a leg up because we are all just responding to the demand for more speed and grip. In what manner we do so is really the only difference. I think the only company dancing the "Mission patent" so to speak is RBK/CCM now that Bauer is the new patent owner.

[Chad Seibel 2]

I think the Vanguard change to 80-76, Hummer change to 80mm, and our brand going with the 100mm set up are all in response to providing more speed and grip which are a direct result of bigger wheels. That started a long time ago I believe as the ancient theory originally was small wheels to stay low to the ground. People were skating on 68s back then. So honestly I don't think any of our brands in regards to being the leading innovator on chasis design has a leg up because we are all just responding to the demand for more speed and grip. In what manner we do so is really the only difference. I think the only company dancing the "Mission patent" so to speak is RBK/CCM now that Bauer is the new patent owner.

I will say that as far as leader in chassis design and innovation that HAS to go to Labeda. They have alwsy been on the forefront of trends in this area. They were there with the flat chassis, they were with Mission and brought the HiLo to the table, They have the top design in the goalie frame with the Predator chassis and they are now there with the Hum'er chassis.

I know they are competitors to Revision, but you have to hand this to them that they innovate the designs in chassis and have been for a lot of years.

[Brian Harte 1]

Is Sure-Grip still around at all?

[mik3 1]

Sure grip just makes roller skates now.

[Brian Harte 1]

Oh I see.

Didn't they have innovations with their frames. I thought they had a pretty early carbon frame.

[sdcopp 1]

I agree with Nabeel, there is the constant demand for bigger-better-faster-more and there have been steps from most inline companies to meet these demands. My local results for what I've seen has shown that there is something for everyone. We have 42 teams in 5 divisions for our adult leagues this session, and I see plenty of Vanguard, Hummer, Tri-Di. Revision's C-note hasn't made much of a splash locally, though I know there are a few players in Denver on them and I'm the crash test dummy here. Also see one of two pairs of Sprungs occasionally. There's been no truly dominant wheel choice either. Good for market health though as choice is always a good thing to have.

I for one am glad that there is such a variety of different products, everyone has something to choose from. For anyone who actually remembers the market from the mid to late 90s, flat frames ruled the world and the choices were primarily Sure-Grip, Final, Labeda with the odd American Research, Motor or Konki frames here and there or the packaged Bauer, Mission and Tour skates with flat frames themselves. Labeda had the Predator with 5 small wheels as a something different item. Tour began at the 9000 skate (1997ish?) with a packaged Hi-Lo and we stuck with flat or 72-80 Hi-Lo (the eventual winner of that choice) for years. Everyone's option was A or B and that was it. Boot choices weren't much either as everyone put out black leather and ballistic nylon boots, be it Riedell, Tour 2000/8000, Mission's initial Proto series, CCM Tacks, Bauer Supremes, Bauer H series and then again options began popping up that differentiated themselves from one another.

Look at where we have come today and there is a ton of innovation and evolution that has come and gone. Every company that contributed deserves a pat on the back, even the ones who are no longer viable businesses. I look at the Hummer as an evolved flat frame, finding ways to squeeze more out of what worked well for a long time (though I realize the process may have taken very different turns that that, the end result is there). Vanguard, C-Note and the defunct Nexed Apollo and Labeda Sensor frames as spins on Hi-Lo to get more out of them somehow. Yes the Tri-Di is how CCM/RBK worked around the patent issue, but there are people that prefer it now and took at the time some engineering on how to provide a similar product that was established and accepted by the masses.

I say for the companies that are succeeding, remember that taking chances is how several of you made it. Keep doing it

@Brian: yep, the short lived H605 frame was carbon fiber

[mik3 1]

Yeah, there was a carbon fiber 605 frame.

[RevisionHockey 0]

Chad - I'm not arguing that in the past LaBeda hasn't been a leader in frame innovation. My statement was to argue the statement that "even our main competitor, the #1 brand in the market changed the HiLo to mimic the all 80 set up by going to their Vanguard system so we must of innovated things here." I don't think that the Vanguard was in response to the hummer but more a response to making the hi-lo quicker and faster.

[Invert 13]

To be honest, I thought the Sensor frame was the best of the batch...

[mik3 1]

I was the first person I knew with the sensor frame, it felt great to play on but once the hilo became king not many shops were stocking 76mm wheels. I was playing like 5x a week at that point, I had to sell the frames after a while 'cause of the inconvenience that came with finding wheels.

[diablo42 0]

Maybe there in the US, people ask for bigger wheels and wants to be faster but here in Spain even though there are lots of playeres using hummer and vanguard chassis, I think the best choice for our smaller courts is the traditional hi-lo. We can get more benefits from this chassis with a shorter wheelbase and a good balance between speed, turning radius, grip, etc...

[Chad Seibel 2]

Maybe there in the US, people ask for bigger wheels and wants to be faster but here in Spain even though there are lots of playeres using hummer and vanguard chassis, I think the best choice for our smaller courts is the traditional hi-lo. We can get more benefits from this chassis with a shorter wheelbase and a good balance between speed, turning radius, grip, etc...

I would like to hear what you think it means to have a better turning radius from a HiLo skate. How do do you think it gives a better turning radius? How do you feel that the HiLo gives better turning and grip?

I am interested in hearing what your thoughts on this. I like to know what guys think, but I love hearing their reasons for why they think and believe what they do.

Thanks bro.

[fatwabbit 93]

Chad... he's not the only one who thinks that a shorter wheelbase gives a smaller turning radius. Try making quick turns on a speed skaters' chassis and you'll be able to feel the difference.

For me, I've done a quick comparison between a vanguard, hilo and sprungs. Having mounted the mentioned frames on the SAME boot, the vanguard had the longest wheelbase, and felt very clumsy (for me) compared to the hilo and sprungs. I just couldnt turn 'comfortably' as I did with the hilo and sprungs...

[sdcopp 1]

It's the premise that smaller wheels have a sharper turning radius. I really think it comes down to the individual skater and economy of scale and speed. A smaller wheel on a smaller floor can absolutely make sense for some since there may not be a full 200X85 surface to build top speed before you're at a wall. Speedskaters get the advantage of having a non-stop track so even at a smaller rink practicing short track laps they can build the speed with bigger wheels.

For some people it doesn't matter though, you can stick them on the same setup in a big rink, small rink, outdoor rink, etc. and they will be able to skate it well regardless.

[Joe Noris 0]

I came a bit late to this thread so I have had a chance to see so many really good posts before I give mine. I have far more experience than most because not only am I older but also I have been involved in both ice and roller hockey for more than 50 years.

I left my home town of Denver when I was 16 to play Jr. hockey in Kitchener, Ontario in 1969. One of the great experiences was going to the Bauer skate factory located there. We entered the building and went through rows and rows of workers who were using industrial sewing machines to make leather skates. We climbed two sets of wooden stairs to a small little room in the back that was used to fit us for custom skates. At the time the only players to get custom skates were current NHL players and those of us on the Kitchener Rangers. On one of my dad’s visits he asked our trainer if he could get a pair of skates and sure enough the next day a pair of custom skates made for Phil Esposito were in my dad’s hands. I still have these skates that were hardly used and yes skates have come a long way but these old leather skates with tube blade holders were really made well, and also worked very well. I also have some of my old wooden sticks that don’t compare to the sticks of today, but the best shooters could still shoot the puck over 100 MPH with wood sticks.

Skates, sticks and protective equipment have all made small incremental moves over the years but hockey in general has grown similar to that of a 3rd world country.

Some of the HOCKEY breakthroughs have been very, very slow. I had coaches that would only allow their players to use straight sticks, no curve whatsoever. Yes it works for some but not most. There are youth ice coaches that wouldn’t allow their players to play roller. I am still amazed to this day why the NHL never got involved with the RHI. During that period of the 90s nothing did more to get kids to play hockey than roller. It is great to see teams like the Ducks and Penguins getting involved in roller today although it’s a shame it took so long and also that they had to become so desperate for their fan base that they finally had to think outside the box. It’s also a shame that the roller hockey innovators that think outside of the box go too far. Pro beach, speed hockey etc. I could never understand why when so many players are loving NARCh, AAU, USAInline, College inline, USARS etc that these great new innovators want to change all the rules, rinks and equipment to make it work. Roller hockey is a great game (without checking)

I have also been amazed how close minded the roller hockey manufacturers are to true innovation. I became involved with Keith and Sprung eight years ago. Keith came to San Diego to have me try his prototypes and after one lap around the rink I told him he had something that was amazing and very special. The maneuverability and stability was phenomenal, the quick starts and stopping was way better than anything else I had used. After a year or so I became a partner with Sprung and then got to witness first hand some real 3rd world actions by the major manufacturers.

One of the major manufacturers basically told us that Sprung frames work great but until we started hurting their market share they would rather not work with an outside supplier, way to take a bold step to advance the sport. Another told me after seeing a player for Canada using them in the World Championships that he didn’t think they would ever make it because “ I don’t think players will ever use a white plastic holder” my response was “don’t let the 1200 players in the NHL know that they might all quit playing.” Lots of other excuses, but mostly no one having the guts to be innovative.

I have a rink in San Diego and have watched hundreds of players buy and use Sprung frames with most of them saying they will never use anything else, myself included. I also know that the frames have had kinks to get out and in the early years and it would have been amazing to have a major manufacture working on them with Keith. Although I have coached Team USA to three gold medals I have never asked any of the players to use them because of my respect for them and their relationship with their main manufacture sponsors. I have had a number of them tell me that they really like the Sprung frames but…

On a recent reunion trip to Kitchener I saw some Menonite families still using a horse and buggy to get around but mostly everyone was driving a car with independent wheel suspension just like Sprung frames. Most of us “old” players are accused of thinking everything was better back then but in my case with the exception of the progress the wheel manufacturers are making it’s still 3rd world progress to me.

Joe Noris

Sprung

[Chad Seibel 2]

Chad... he's not the only one who thinks that a shorter wheelbase gives a smaller turning radius. Try making quick turns on a speed skaters' chassis and you'll be able to feel the difference.

For me, I've done a quick comparison between a vanguard, hilo and sprungs. Having mounted the mentioned frames on the SAME boot, the vanguard had the longest wheelbase, and felt very clumsy (for me) compared to the hilo and sprungs. I just couldnt turn 'comfortably' as I did with the hilo and sprungs...

Wabbit, what size skate or shoe are you? I agree with a shorter wheel base being good for turning. You used the speedskater example which is exactly what I use for this topic. If your wheels are below your skates and not sticking out, then you will turn well. If they stick out,, it will be tougher to get used to. Our size 7 is the worst size for our wheel base.

However, we took that size down to a 76mm wheel for a couple of years and the outcry to us was that players wanted the 80mm wheels, so we were forced to go back to it.

Why I asked this was that people tell me they turn better on the HiLo because of the small wheels in front and they are not referring to the wheel base, but rather to some argument over the revolution of the wheels or some type of thing like that which is just plain bogus.

Joe, I like a lot of your comments on the issue and certainly everyone will have their opinion. I also agree with sdcopp about this in his posts, that everyone will have their preference. That is where I am at in my role at Tour. HiLo is a good chassis and now they have they Vanguard HiLo which is a close set up to the Hum'er set up. People like the Hum'er and people like the HiLo. From what I see on the boards here is that there are players who like the Sprung chassis as well. I have skated the Sprung chassis and it is a good chassis, but not the corvette to horse and buggy comparison that you make it out to be. I think Keith has a good product and i also think Mission has a good product. At the end of the day, however, I feel that we have the optimum blend of speed and grip on our skates with the Hum'er set up, again, open for debate.

Believe me if I felt that there was a system out there that would give us a huge edge in sales, I would be jumping at the chance, as would our competitors. I could be wrong in my estimation, but I guess time will tell. I can tell you that you and Keith are two quality guys in this industry that respect very much.

[Sprungster 5]

If you go by wheelbase only, the Vanguard is shortest, followed by the Humm'er, followed by the A6. It's not the length of the board, but the motion of the ocean.

[Chad Seibel 2]

All depends on the size of the skate as well