Warrior Ritual G2 extensive write up in InGoal Magazine

[Netminder32 32]

Just received this in my email today. Pretty thorough analysis of the new Warrior Ritual G2 gear.

InGoal Magazine Warrior Ritual G2 Special Edition.

http://magazine.ingoalmag.com/publication/?i=185997

[Phantom 19]

I skipped buying the Rituals because I figured the next generation would be even better (that, and my Smith 5000 set is just never going to die). Seriously...no words for how awesome these look, especially the gloves with removable palms. So much want.

[Souldriver 64]

im not a goalie, and this looks awesome

[BenderHockey 127]

That's it. I'm buying new goalie gear!

[JR Boucicaut 3797]

im not a goalie, and this looks awesome

Agreed. Eric Marvin came into the store a couple of months ago and was talking to me about what they had come up with; I came away very impressed.

[Law Goalie 147]

It's fantastic stuff, but IG, as usual, misses some of the most important aspects of the gear...

On the blocker, the Velcro 'mechanically separable fastener' palm means that relative hand position on the blocker board is now fully selectable. Hand position relative to the board has been, historically, one of the major brand and model differentiators on the blocker, a piece of equipment that many goalies claim cannot possibly be improved: 'a blocker's a blocker' and so on. It's bloody genius. (There is an issue with the implementation, but I suspect it'll be remedied in the production models.)

Thin sidewalls are, I think, a hangover of the period when they were introduced, when thin blocker boards were increasingly common-- for no bloody reason, being neither lighter nor more useful. The G2 sidewall looks *exactly* like a sensibly thickened version of the Brian Heaton-designed CCM Gatekeeper, which is one of my favourite blockers of all time. (I still use one from time to time.) I also like that this design is reflected in the refined lateral wedge on the pads.

On the glove, I'm not sure exactly how "the InGoal testers didn't know about the clean construction" (that is, the bindingless perimeter and the segmentation and pocket-sewing of plastics) -- whether that means they didn't see its benefits, or were totally ignorant of it -- but it's one of the most important aspects of the glove. It is, incidentally, one of the great unheralded features of the legendary TPS Bionic and Vaughn T5500, two of the premier catching gloves ever made; as TPS 'dumbed down' the Bionic in successive versions, leading to its final, slightly dismal incarnation as part of the SWD R10 line, this was one of the things that vanished.

On the pads, the 'Profile Lock' relies rather brilliantly on changing the relative tension in the material of the face and back of the pad, rather than by how the foams are glued together (per Reebok/CCM's pad cores) or by making slots for foam inserts (Bauer's MyFlex). The review does mention the degree of control this can give (you can select the angle of the upper break manually), but neglects to mention that the mechanism for it is entirely unique. Take any pad and bend it significantly at the top break: the material on the face will be tightened, and the material on the back will loosen and pucker like a bulldog's face. If you then hold the rear fabric (which is typically 420-600D nylon, possessing minimal stretch) bunched up, the pad stays bent.

The extended knee (Knee Drive System) has a clear precedent in the Vaughn 'Lehtonen knee', which is itself the inheritor of a long line of pads, going back to Smith's original 'box pad' designs and beyond, of an extended medial gusset at the knee to provide a longer, stiffer landing for the knee. The NHL's Rule 11 requires that knee- and calf-wings be sewn to the pad in a particular way, but does not specify anything other than a maximum total depth of 10" from the face of the pad to the trailing edge of the medial protection. IG mistakenly claims that the extension ("all the extra room") was made by "thinning out the thigh rise," which is in fact above the knee, when Warrior clearly *thickened* the medial edge of the pad to push the available landing area closer to that 10" maximum.

The elastic toe and boot straps are, again, not so much new as newly and uniquely refined. I've been using various attachments of elastic toe-ties for five years, and I was by no means an early adopter. Smith's design looks like it solves *most* of the problems associated with traditional designs, which were anchored through the toe-bridge, rather than across the bottom of the pad as on the G2s.

That said, it's ridiculous that IG claims "not a single InGoal tester noticed any resistance with their skate [sic] dropping to the ice" in butterfly transitions. Elastic material is by definition resistant; it would be impossible for the elastic toe-ties to 'pop' the pad back to the center of the foot without resistance. In fact, anyone who has used elastic toes (or has a rudimentary grasp of physics) would tell you that elastic toes *add* resistance over appropriately slack toe-ties (or no toe-ties, obviously). This is not a bad thing, since that resistance means that the toe of the skate is pulling the medial edge of the pad with more force toward the ice in the butterfly, and securing the boot atop the foot in upright movements. There is no delay in engagement with the pad until the length of the static toe-tie is hit; the elastic toe-tie exerts force geometrically, and with a much longer (effectively nonexistent) upper limit on stretch, as opposed to the absolute limit of static toes. IG's review doesn't get it, reflecting the same kind of stupid language that has people talking about 'pad rotation' (over-rotation, under-rotation, etc.) when pads obviously do not rotate; legs rotate behind pads, which remain facing up the ice.

The sewn breaks in the Ritual calf-wing are not, contrary to the review, an "innovation"; they're a slight change from the original Rituals and the SP6000s.

As an aside, including proper standalone knee-pads with the G2 pads is, as far as I know, a first in the goalie business. It's the first time a company has NOT cheaped out on knee protection by trying to design some half-assed, easily-sewn flap (a thigh board by any other name) that will save them a few bucks. Warrior deserves to be seriously commended for being the first company to take knee protection this seriously.

[Netminder32 32]

Yeah... what he said. ^

I'm reserving judgement at this point. I find that with all the latest and greatest stuff from all the manufacturers, you really need to wear it and experience it to form an opinion. Sure it looks great... but how does it work "for you"... Maybe there will be a demo set at Winterfest???

[Law Goalie 147]

Put it this way: the Warrior team really, REALLY learned from the original Rituals. Every weakness, however minor, now has a solution; every strength was improved. Naturally, I'm holding off anything conclusive until I get to try them out, but the G1 Rituals (which I never did get to review, but which I have seen on goalies I've been coaching and tried out myself) are wonderful pads, and they have definitely been taken to a new level, if you'll pardon the cliché. The Ritual gloves were a Beaudry holdover, and did not, I'm sad to say, make favourable impressions. These new gloves are the culmination of about a decade of Dr. Smith R&D, finished off by a design team that really seems to be finding its identity.

IG even neglects to mention that the basic bindingless pattern is fundamentally different. Look at the corners of the pad: the way it's constructed is completely different, from different textile patterns to different sewing and lasting. The only two (and I meanly the two sole and lonely) wear-points on the G1 Rituals -- the strap-tab on the knee-wing and the vertical seam on the front edge of the toe -- have been eliminated; while the first one is just good sense (and taking a page from Lefebvre), then second one is structural magic.

One word of caution for those playing in 'sanctioned' leagues that abide strictly by versions of NHL Rule 11... If you compare the placement of the knee-strap on Gustavsson's pads with the standard placement (9), you can see that on the KW-approved pads the strap is coming out of the trailing edge of the knee-block, as on all through-strapped Lefebvre knee-blocks, rather than through the top of the block about an inch from the edge on the retail pads. If you're ordering these for use in strict leagues, DEFINITELY ask Warrior for the former instead of the latter.

[Souldriver 64]

Wow Law Goalie, that is a breakdown and a half of real tech stuff. And I have to say after playing goalie when I was younger and it becoming too expensive as I became of age of starting to pay for my own hockey gear, this is the first time in a long time I yearn to get back in there... And really wish I never stopped.

[Law Goalie 147]

SD, it's all in good fun, having made a study of what Pete has done for the position. He's an asset to the sport. When I'm in the business of handing out honourary doctorates, I'll be pushing one for him.

It's funny how the singular nature of goaltending -- the perspective, the technique, the gear -- can really draw the imagination. I was in exactly the position you are (though for different reasons) not that long ago, and the two best things I did were 1) get as much ice and as much video and knowledge as possible, and 2) start coaching, or rather studying and apprenticing to coach. You'd be amazed how rewarding positional coaching can be.

Now, on the subject of Warrior innovation...

Sara Marschand of PAW (Protective Athletic Wear) has been posting on Facebook about how she designed and launched a removable blocker palm about six years before Warrior. Her claims are (at least implicitly) pretty inflammatory:

The original Hot Swap Palm made by me in 2007. I've been playing with one in my blocker since then.

[...]

Well one way to look at this is that it must have been a great idea since they decided to take off with it.

This was on my website, it was called Hot Swap Palms in the catcher and blocker. You can take them out and put them back in in under 30 seconds.

Now, by way of preface, I admire and respect Sara and her work. She is arguably the foremost goalie gear-repair expert on the planet, and even more admirable for being a woman in a field and a sport dominated by men. She got where she is not because of who she knows or where she played, but because she's extremely talented and dedicated. In this respect, she's a lot like Smith himself. I have no idea why NHL teams aren't clamouring to hire her as an EQM.

However, in this case, she is entirely out of line.

First off, Sara's 2007 design uses metal snaps; her later designs still primarily use snaps, with some loops and hook+look as well; Warrior's design is 100% Velcro 'mechanically separable fastener'. Warrior's design also allows the hand position to be controlled as a continuous variable (ie. an analogue); Sara's does not, since it only snaps into one position on the board. Sara's design also adds a significant amount of weight and bulk to the blocker in metal snaps and strap-leather tabs; Warrior's adds just a few grams of fabric. Her design is also *clearly* a retrofit onto existing blocker-palm patterns, while Warrior's is a ground-up redesign. Finally, Warrior's lower cuff is integrated with the palm; Sara's does not appear to be.

Second, the her implicit claim is that she has some kind of ethical prior art on removable palms, as distinct from actual legally patent prior art. This argument *would*, from an ethical perspective, hold some weight. Pete himself was royally screwed over by people exploiting his unpatented designs for years before he joined Warrior.

The problem is that Sara's argument is, though at least potentially sound, entirely unfounded.

There is prior art that significantly predates her work.

Removable palms are not a new idea in hockey, let alone in goaltending. Rawlings retailed a zip-in/zip-out palm in the early 2000s (IIRC) which, while not that successful, got a whole lot more attention than Sara's work, since it was widely available at retail in a period when Rawlings was making a big push into hockey. (NB: I would invite JR, Chadd, DS, or anyone with more knowledge in this period than I to buttress this.)

Second, and perhaps most importantly, there is a material difference between the kind of deliberate intellectual theft and reverse-engineering that happened to Pete and what is going on with Sara. Pete had someone from a rival company order some of his equipment, tear it apart, patent parts of it, and release it with a great deal of press and fanfare as though they had originated it themselves. As far as I know, nothing remotely comparable has happened here.

More to the point, there are discussions of the possibility of removable palms that significantly predate Sara's 2007 design. The idea was in circulation, even if it was assumed by the laiety to be impossible.

Finally, on a personal note, I *know* that Pete Smith would not have done what Sara implies; he is in fact the last person on Earth who would do something like this, having been victimised himself in precisely this way.

There is, in short, no reason whatever to believe that Pete Smith or Warrior acted unethically in this situation. It is entirely probably that they came up with this design on their own, inspired either by the public discussion, the Rawlings precedent, or by simple ingenuity: the IG article clearly states, from Smith, that the adjustable and removable trapper palm came, in their process, before the blocker, and Sara's removable trapper palm is a lacing-based prototype that has never been released.

I'm now going to do what I *never* do, and repost this on GSBB...