Are low kick sticks just hype?

[Sniper9 529]

10 hours ago, z1ggy said:

Interesting. Thought maybe he'd be using one of the LK versions that I see floating around. Has anybody ever heard from players on why they'd use the more traditional profile as a forward and not the low kick? Is it purely because they want something for one timers or is it a blade construction thing and they don't feel kick point makes a difference to their snap shots? 

Edit: Not sure if I can post this link or not but this may provide some insight on why players use a certain profile/stick. For example, according to this, even though Nexus is kind of labeled a "mid kick" stick, it plays pretty similarly to the 1x are far as how the profile looks. It's really interesting how quickly "mid kick" point or "clap bomb" shafts change profile but sticks meant more for quick release shots are somewhat uniform comparitively. I wonder if players just prefer a super stiff blade to help keep the face from opening up? Take a look. 

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/hockeyflexprofiles.php

 

Would seem like my QRL that I thought was a low kick this whole time plays more like a Super Tacks and less like a 1X... interesting.

Maybe you're over thinking it and it's just what the player grew up using mainly and stuck with it. Or what they were forced to use at the jr level etc. Thr super low kick technology/idea is fairly new. Part of it is probably a marketing gimmick. At the retail level. Pros get to choose exactly what they want and not care about whether it's called a drop kick taper or sabre taper or xe taper etc. 

[GoalForFun 176]

20 hours ago, z1ggy said:

Makes sense. So do you think players like McDavid/Kane that are using Tacks/Supreme profiles have a different blade in there? CCM says the blade on Super Tacks is pretty stiff. 

Kane uses a super stiff blade, but I think he’s one of the few.

[z1ggy 81]

On 11/29/2019 at 10:22 PM, Sniper9 said:

Maybe you're over thinking it and it's just what the player grew up using mainly and stuck with it. Or what they were forced to use at the jr level etc. Thr super low kick technology/idea is fairly new. Part of it is probably a marketing gimmick. At the retail level. Pros get to choose exactly what they want and not care about whether it's called a drop kick taper or sabre taper or xe taper etc. 

Could be. Would be cool to see what new players use vs what the middle aged vs the older guys. I honestly don't even feel a huge difference between my FT2 and my QRL, which according to that link I posted before has a profile more like a Supreme. I notice blade stiffness and curve more than anything...

Oh and something just popped into my head that's somewhat anecdotal about this topic. I was listening to a podcast about golf pretty recently (one of my main hobbies) and and I believe it was the CEO/owner of Accra golf shafts who was saying how a golf shaft (talking graphite ones here) all flex within about 1 inch around a given focal point, regardless of if it's considered "low" "mid" or "high" flex point, i.e. they basically all flex in the same area, regardless of flex profile. This would lead me to think that it's maybe pretty similar with hockey sticks and that it's really more about feel rather than these huge differences in flex zone like in the CCM chart I posted before.

Edited December 2, 2019 by z1ggy

[krisdrum 233]

On 11/30/2019 at 7:47 PM, z1ggy said:

I honestly don't even feel a huge difference between my FT2 and my QRL, which according to that link I posted before has a profile more like a Supreme. I notice blade stiffness and curve more than anything...

Oh and something just popped into my head that's somewhat anecdotal about this topic. I was listening to a podcast about golf pretty recently (one of my main hobbies) and and I believe it was the CEO/owner of Accra golf shafts who was saying how a golf shaft (talking graphite ones here) all flex within about 1 inch around a given focal point, regardless of if it's considered "low" "mid" or "high" flex point, i.e. they basically all flex in the same area, regardless of flex profile. This would lead me to think that it's maybe pretty similar with hockey sticks and that it's really more about feel rather than these huge differences in flex zone like in the CCM chart I posted before.

I'm assuming it is a mistake, but the scale on the Supreme 1S graph is double the scale on all the other graphs.  All the graphs show 5 inch increments up to 50 inches.  The Supreme graph shows 20 inch increments up to 120.  It would be a pretty flawed testing protocol to treat one stick in a very different way from the rest, but it does make me question comparing that graph against the others.

 

Not being a materials engineer, I'm not sure how similar producing a graphite golf shaft is to making a hockey stick shaft.  Does graphite come in sheets like carbon fiber?  Are there different qualities of graphite?  Can you manipulate the lay-up of graphite in the same way?  I would want to know more about that before comparing the flex manipulation for each shaft type.   

[VegasHockey 1280]

I am doing a survey on Reddit, currently have 100 responses. I think the data is very interesting.

Lots of players using low and mid kick sticks and very few using variable and high kick sticks. 

https://netorgft3775772-my.sharepoint.com/:x:/g/personal/nicholas_skateworksproshop_com/EdT_YsfCxRpLqMHBDZFlGloBnJVT6SM6jtcU_xemDPH3gg?e=khgSm0

 

[z1ggy 81]

3 hours ago, krisdrum said:

I'm assuming it is a mistake, but the scale on the Supreme 1S graph is double the scale on all the other graphs.  All the graphs show 5 inch increments up to 50 inches.  The Supreme graph shows 20 inch increments up to 120.  It would be a pretty flawed testing protocol to treat one stick in a very different way from the rest, but it does make me question comparing that graph against the others.

 

Not being a materials engineer, I'm not sure how similar producing a graphite golf shaft is to making a hockey stick shaft.  Does graphite come in sheets like carbon fiber?  Are there different qualities of graphite?  Can you manipulate the lay-up of graphite in the same way?  I would want to know more about that before comparing the flex manipulation for each shaft type.   

I'm guessing it's just a type-o on the scale they didn't catch.

I'm not a mat sci engineer myself, but knowing what I do know about golf shaft manufacturing, it's pretty similar. I'm sure there's some people at Taylormade or other golf companies who would know... My old RBZ stick actually has 'Taylormade' written on it I think... in small letters, down by the blade. Probably some kind of joint project on the creation of the stick possibly, maybe CCM borrowed some intellectual property on manufacturing. 

[z1ggy 81]

58 minutes ago, SkateWorksPNW said:

I am doing a survey on Reddit, currently have 100 responses. I think the data is very interesting.

Lots of players using low and mid kick sticks and very few using variable and high kick sticks. 

https://netorgft3775772-my.sharepoint.com/:x:/g/personal/nicholas_skateworksproshop_com/EdT_YsfCxRpLqMHBDZFlGloBnJVT6SM6jtcU_xemDPH3gg?e=khgSm0

 

What I find interesting is if you filter by flex and look at just junior sticks (anything under 70 flex) it's an overwhelming majority low kick... about 4:1 low kick to mid kick and 9:1 low to variable. But when you look at 70 flex and up... the ratio changes quite a bit; about 1:1 low kick to mid kick and just 4:1 low to variable. So I'd be willing to say that younger kids in general are more into the low kick stuff. Now is that just a trend or because there's real "science" to it? Who knows. Would be cool if you could also add in to the poll asking why they chose the stick they did. 

[VegasHockey 1280]

4 minutes ago, z1ggy said:

What I find interesting is if you filter by flex and look at just junior sticks (anything under 70 flex) it's an overwhelming majority low kick... about 4:1 low kick to mid kick and 9:1 low to variable. But when you look at 70 flex and up... the ratio changes quite a bit; about 1:1 low kick to mid kick and just 4:1 low to variable. So I'd be willing to say that younger kids in general are more into the low kick stuff. Now is that just a trend or because there's real "science" to it? Who knows. Would be cool if you could also add in to the poll asking why they chose the stick they did. 

I am trying to keep it simple as possible. Too many questions and people tend to get annoyed and will provide incorrect info or won't even complete the form. I have found over time the "sweet spot" for collecting data via forms is around the 20-30 second range of time needed to complete the entire questionnaire from start to finish. After this one is done, I will try a V2 of it and see how that goes. 

[z1ggy 81]

13 hours ago, SkateWorksPNW said:

I am trying to keep it simple as possible. Too many questions and people tend to get annoyed and will provide incorrect info or won't even complete the form. I have found over time the "sweet spot" for collecting data via forms is around the 20-30 second range of time needed to complete the entire questionnaire from start to finish. After this one is done, I will try a V2 of it and see how that goes. 

Yeah that's true. Attention span and all...

My one question that I really have after seeing this thread is simply, do low kick sticks really bend that much lower than mid kick sticks... and do they really get shots off quicker?

Is anybody in the scientific community looking at this kind of thing? It's funny because with golf there are SO many 'nerd' types out there who all they do is analyze data and golf equipment and a lot of "myths" that OEMs claim like X shaft will do this and Y shaft will do that are starting to mostly get explained away. Like I said, companies say this shaft is a "mid bend" one and this other one is a "high bend point" one yet... all shafts bend in pretty much the same spot when you swing them. I know it's not apples to apples but I still wonder if it's similar for hockey sticks.

[krisdrum 233]

50 minutes ago, z1ggy said:

Yeah that's true. Attention span and all...

My one question that I really have after seeing this thread is simply, do low kick sticks really bend that much lower than mid kick sticks... and do they really get shots off quicker?

Is anybody in the scientific community looking at this kind of thing? It's funny because with golf there are SO many 'nerd' types out there who all they do is analyze data and golf equipment and a lot of "myths" that OEMs claim like X shaft will do this and Y shaft will do that are starting to mostly get explained away. Like I said, companies say this shaft is a "mid bend" one and this other one is a "high bend point" one yet... all shafts bend in pretty much the same spot when you swing them. I know it's not apples to apples but I still wonder if it's similar for hockey sticks.

Survey response likelihood is less about attention span and more about "value".  What value are the respondents providing compared to the potential value they'll get back.  This "calculation" includes their time to complete, usefulness of the information, sensitivity of the information, etc.  If the value ratio isn't tipped in the respondent's favor, you are way less likely to have a strong response rate.  Similarly how intimate the questions are (are you asking very personal things or not) will be added to their calculation and may be a factor if their anonymity/confidentiality is in question.

Your question about "do they really get shots off quicker" is answered (somewhat) on a linked page to the Tennis Warehouse page already linked.  According to the research they did, the Vapor 1X had the quickest release of the sticks they tested (20.7 ms).  Worst is True A6.0 SBP at (23.3 ms).  We are talking less than 3 millisecond difference between the best and worst sticks on their list.  The mean/average of all the sticks tested is 22.4 ms. That gives us a standard deviation of less than 1 for all the data points provided, which would not be scientifically significant.  So, is there a difference... yes.  Is it one that scientifically makes a difference...no.  According to Wikipedia's page on milliseconds, a horsefly's wing flap is 3 milliseconds.  If a human can pick out 1 wing flap of a horsefly, I'd be amazed.  So.. maybe they are "hype".

So if we take the science off the table as being significant, it comes down to feel/proprioception.  Stiffer blade feel vs. softer blade feel.  Where the stick flexes compared to where your hands naturally fall on the shaft to give the sensation of flex back to your body.  Etc.   

[z1ggy 81]

45 minutes ago, krisdrum said:

Survey response likelihood is less about attention span and more about "value".  What value are the respondents providing compared to the potential value they'll get back.  This "calculation" includes their time to complete, usefulness of the information, sensitivity of the information, etc.  If the value ratio isn't tipped in the respondent's favor, you are way less likely to have a strong response rate.  Similarly how intimate the questions are (are you asking very personal things or not) will be added to their calculation and may be a factor if their anonymity/confidentiality is in question.

Your question about "do they really get shots off quicker" is answered (somewhat) on a linked page to the Tennis Warehouse page already linked.  According to the research they did, the Vapor 1X had the quickest release of the sticks they tested (20.7 ms).  Worst is True A6.0 SBP at (23.3 ms).  We are talking less than 3 millisecond difference between the best and worst sticks on their list.  The mean/average of all the sticks tested is 22.4 ms. That gives us a standard deviation of less than 1 for all the data points provided, which would not be scientifically significant.  So, is there a difference... yes.  Is it one that scientifically makes a difference...no.  According to Wikipedia's page on milliseconds, a horsefly's wing flap is 3 milliseconds.  If a human can pick out 1 wing flap of a horsefly, I'd be amazed.  So.. maybe they are "hype".

So if we take the science off the table as being significant, it comes down to feel/proprioception.  Stiffer blade feel vs. softer blade feel.  Where the stick flexes compared to where your hands naturally fall on the shaft to give the sensation of flex back to your body.  Etc.   

Oh, okay I missed that link about the response time of the sticks, thanks for filling me in, solid data there. I always had a hunch that it was more feel based than anything else because that's what the data says about the golf industry which I'm much more technically savvy in.

So I wonder if the probably "non adult" respondents seemed to prefer lower kicking sticks simply because they feel easier to load given they are possibly less strong than adults who responded. Man... now I really want to get a Nexus and also a 1x to try for myself... Apparently my QRL would have the stiffest blade and mid area and then I've got an FT2 which covers the variable kick (which I can't feel btw... feels like low mid kick to my hands.

 

[VegasHockey 1280]

1 hour ago, krisdrum said:

Your question about "do they really get shots off quicker" is answered (somewhat) on a linked page to the Tennis Warehouse page already linked.  According to the research they did, the Vapor 1X had the quickest release of the sticks they tested (20.7 ms).  Worst is True A6.0 SBP at (23.3 ms).  We are talking less than 3 millisecond difference between the best and worst sticks on their list.  The mean/average of all the sticks tested is 22.4 ms. That gives us a standard deviation of less than 1 for all the data points provided, which would not be scientifically significant.  So, is there a difference... yes.  Is it one that scientifically makes a difference...no.  According to Wikipedia's page on milliseconds, a horsefly's wing flap is 3 milliseconds.  If a human can pick out 1 wing flap of a horsefly, I'd be amazed.  So.. maybe they are "hype".

So if we take the science off the table as being significant, it comes down to feel/proprioception.  Stiffer blade feel vs. softer blade feel.  Where the stick flexes compared to where your hands naturally fall on the shaft to give the sensation of flex back to your body.  Etc.   

We all know hockey is a game of inches and milliseconds. There was a presentation I saw recently talking about how 3% increase in puck speed, when less than 10M from net, can result in a goal vs a save. I redacted the slide so I could share it. 

1 hour ago, z1ggy said:

Oh, okay I missed that link about the response time of the sticks, thanks for filling me in, solid data there. I always had a hunch that it was more feel based than anything else because that's what the data says about the golf industry which I'm much more technically savvy in.

So I wonder if the probably "non adult" respondents seemed to prefer lower kicking sticks simply because they feel easier to load given they are possibly less strong than adults who responded. Man... now I really want to get a Nexus and also a 1x to try for myself... Apparently my QRL would have the stiffest blade and mid area and then I've got an FT2 which covers the variable kick (which I can't feel btw... feels like low mid kick to my hands.

In talking to many of the manufacturers  over the last week each one of them made a very similar and useful point. NHL players are incredibly strong compared to the majority of us, and as such a low kick stick that is easy to load would likely cause too much deflection in their shot, simply due to how powerful they are. This was something I didn't take into consideration. I thought about weight, but I didn't think about overall strength. I weigh ~180lbs but I dont nearly have the same strength as Nikita Kucherov or Mitch Marner who weigh 170lbs and uses a mid kick stick. 

Edited December 3, 2019 by SkateWorksPNW

[z1ggy 81]

34 minutes ago, SkateWorksPNW said:

We all know hockey is a game of inches and milliseconds. There was a presentation I saw recently talking about how 3% increase in puck speed, when less than 10M from net, can result in a goal vs a save. I redacted the slide so I could share it. 

In talking to many of the manufacturers  over the last week each one of them made a very similar and useful point. NHL players are incredibly strong compared to the majority of us, and as such a low kick stick that is easy to load would likely cause too much deflection in their shot, simply due to how powerful they are. This was something I didn't take into consideration. I thought about weight, but I didn't think about overall strength. I weigh ~180lbs but I dont nearly have the same strength as Nikita Kucherov or Mitch Marner who weigh 170lbs and uses a mid kick stick. 

Yeah that's probably a huge reason, especially for forwards who take one timers. Moving up in flex might make the stick feel too harsh when they aren't loading it so just having the kick point moved up a little bit by stiffing up the lower portion of the stick might help keep the blade from opening up too much if they take a clapper.

[marka 526]

Howdy,

1ms at 80mph is ~1.5".

I think I'll worry about other things first.  🙂

Mark

[psulion22 402]

1 hour ago, SkateWorksPNW said:

We all know hockey is a game of inches and milliseconds. There was a presentation I saw recently talking about how 3% increase in puck speed, when less than 10M from net, can result in a goal vs a save. I redacted the slide so I could share it. 

In talking to many of the manufacturers  over the last week each one of them made a very similar and useful point. NHL players are incredibly strong compared to the majority of us, and as such a low kick stick that is easy to load would likely cause too much deflection in their shot, simply due to how powerful they are. This was something I didn't take into consideration. I thought about weight, but I didn't think about overall strength. I weigh ~180lbs but I dont nearly have the same strength as Nikita Kucherov or Mitch Marner who weigh 170lbs and uses a mid kick stick. 

Also keep in mind that most of the discussion about shot and release speed is considering the shot event in a vacuum - that being how release speed translates into the goalkeeper's ability to stop a clean shot on a static angle.  But there are other variables that would affect the potential scoring ability of a shot where release speed would matter.  The biggest one to me would be the presence of a shooting lane. A few milliseconds could be the difference between a shot getting through and going off a shin guard or stick blade.  It may not affect the goalie's ability to stop the puck, but rather whether he has to.  Another would be the total motion required to release a shot.  A lower kick flex point allows the stick to load with less motion on it, meaning the puck doesn't have to travel as far in the player's stance to generate power.  The difference in time it takes for the puck to leave the blade is nearly negligent, however the amount of movement and applicable time it takes to create the shot event is pretty large.  A slap shot takes longer than a full wrist shot which takes longer than a quick toe snap shot.  The low kick allows the player to shoot the puck with power from more hand and body positions which gives the goaltender less time to recognize the shot motion and anticipate the shot.  The time the goalie has to see the shot coming off the blade is about the same.  But the time the goalie has to anticipate having to look for it is much less with a low kick stick.  Being able to deceive a goalie by releasing a full power shot with the hands more in front of the body, which can be used for a deke or pass as well, is more effective than just trying to blow it by him.

As for why more NHL players aren't using low kicks if release speed is so important, I suspect that second part is exactly it.  These guys are so strong that they can create the same release speed with a mid kick as a low kick, without the blade deflection that often accompanies low kicks as a result of the tapers used to transfer maximum energy.

Edited December 3, 2019 by psulion22

[Hills 712]

13 minutes ago, psulion22 said:

Also keep in mind that most of the discussion about shot and release speed is considering the shot event in a vacuum - that being how release speed translates into the goalkeeper's ability to stop a clean shot on a static angle.  But there are other variables that would affect the potential scoring ability of a shot where release speed would matter.  The biggest one to me would be the presence of a shooting lane. A few milliseconds could be the difference between a shot getting through and going off a shin guard or stick blade.  It may not affect the goalie's ability to stop the puck, but rather whether he has to.  Another would be the total motion required to release a shot.  A lower kick flex point allows the stick to load with less motion on it, meaning the puck doesn't have to travel as far in the player's stance to generate power.  The difference in time it takes for the puck to leave the blade is nearly negligent, however the amount of movement and applicable time it takes to create the shot event is pretty large.  A slap shot takes longer than a full wrist shot which takes longer than a quick toe snap shot.  The low kick allows the player to shoot the puck with power from more hand and body positions which gives the goaltender less time to recognize the shot motion and anticipate the shot.  The time the goalie has to see the shot coming off the blade is about the same.  But the time the goalie has to anticipate having to look for it is much less with a low kick stick.  Being able to deceive a goalie by releasing a full power shot with the hands more in front of the body, which can be used for a deke or pass as well, is more effective than just trying to blow it by him.

As for why more NHL players aren't using low kicks if release speed is so important, I suspect that second part is exactly it.  These guys are so strong that they can create the same release speed with a mid kick as a low kick, without the blade deflection that often accompanies low kicks as a result of the tapers used to transfer maximum energy.

I don't even look at it as "low kick gets off faster so goalie has less of a time to react." It's more of "I have less time to ensure proper technique and load so low kicks allow me to just quickly fling it at the net trying to get around legs or a block." The shot ends up being more consistent as the stick does more of the work for me.

[psulion22 402]

2 minutes ago, Hills said:

I don't even look at it as "low kick gets off faster so goalie has less of a time to react." It's more of "I have less time to ensure proper technique and load so low kicks allow me to just quickly fling it at the net trying to get around legs or a block." The shot ends up being more consistent as the stick does more of the work for me.

Yep, and NHL guys are so strong they don't need the true low kick to do the work for them.  So they move the kick point up to get more velocity through energy transfer and less deflection.

[Hills 712]

13 minutes ago, psulion22 said:

Yep, and NHL guys are so strong they don't need the true low kick to do the work for them.  So they move the kick point up to get more velocity through energy transfer and less deflection.

Which also makes sense that 99% of the guys that can blow pucks by me are using Supreme, Nexus, Tacks, Jetspeed.

[psulion22 402]

31 minutes ago, Hills said:

Which also makes sense that 99% of the guys that can blow pucks by me are using Supreme, Nexus, Tacks, Jetspeed.

I find that 99% of the guys that can blow pucks by me are using hockey sticks.

[puckpilot 312]

Another thing to think about for release is the flex some of the NHL players use relative to their weight/strength. Matthews is 223lbs and uses an 80 flex. I bet that helps him get an easier and quicker release while maintaining more stability in the blade. 

I don’t know about anyone else but I see beerleaguers who are not as big or strong use 80+ flexes  

 

 

[z1ggy 81]

15 minutes ago, puckpilot said:

Another thing to think about for release is the flex some of the NHL players use relative to their weight/strength. Matthews is 223lbs and uses an 80 flex. I bet that helps him get an easier and quicker release while maintaining more stability in the blade. 

I don’t know about anyone else but I see beerleaguers who are not as big or strong use 80+ flexes  

 

 

100% this, too. I think I even heard Kakko and also Phil Kessler aka Mr Hotdogz use intermediate sticks, some or even all of the time. Ever since I switched to 75 flex from 85, my I notice in warm up or practices that I'm actually shooting pucks past my goalie on a much more frequent basis. I still think I'm going to end up caving in and buying a 1X lite or ADV just to see what a legit low kick does for me though. We'll see if it can kick out the FT2.

[krisdrum 233]

4 hours ago, z1ggy said:

100% this, too. I think I even heard Kakko and also Phil Kessler aka Mr Hotdogz use intermediate sticks, some or even all of the time. Ever since I switched to 75 flex from 85, my I notice in warm up or practices that I'm actually shooting pucks past my goalie on a much more frequent basis. I still think I'm going to end up caving in and buying a 1X lite or ADV just to see what a legit low kick does for me though. We'll see if it can kick out the FT2.

Phil Kessel, Johnny Gaudreau, and I'm sure countless others use low flex sticks compared to the common guideline of 1/2 body weight.  I think the days of 90, 100, 110 flexes being the norm are behind us.  Stick tech has gotten to the point where a lower flex is a more versatile tool.  I have nowhere near the skill of any of those guys, but have seen much better shots come from dropping my flex from 85 down to 65, as a 5-6, 180lber, I think the lower flex is better for me.

 

Is the ADV a low kick?  Given the Supreme badging and everything I've read, I thought it was still mid-kick.  Did I miss something?

[psulion22 402]

12 minutes ago, krisdrum said:

Is the ADV a low kick?  Given the Supreme badging and everything I've read, I thought it was still mid-kick.  Did I miss something?

ADV is a construction technique that cuts weight.  It was first used on the Vapor line, but now they offer it on all 3 stick lines - Vapor ADV, 1NXL, Supreme ADV - maintaining the flex profile of those lines.

[krisdrum 233]

1 minute ago, psulion22 said:

ADV is a construction technique that cuts weight.  It was first used on the Vapor line, but now they offer it on all 3 stick lines - Vapor ADV, 1NXL, Supreme ADV - maintaining the flex profile of those lines.

Thanks.  Was only aware of the new Supreme ADV.  Didn't realize similar tech was available in all three lines. 

[psulion22 402]

4 minutes ago, krisdrum said:

Thanks.  Was only aware of the new Supreme ADV.  Didn't realize similar tech was available in all three lines. 

Right now, only the Supreme is available retail.  The Vapor was originally, but they have long sold out.  To get Vapor or Nexus ADVs you need to find pro stocks with codes BGP2B and 1NXL, respectively.

Edited December 4, 2019 by psulion22