Quad 0 Profile

[Rene Seiler]

Iknow many of the members here absolutely love quad profiles. I've tried a few different times and I literally can barely skate on them. I've been playing hockey for 45 years and played at a pretty high level, so I'm a decent skater. I find that I have zero agility on a quad. One thing that confuses me is the claim that the short front radius allows for tighter turns. I could see how this would be true for hard cuts when you're moving fast and leaning forward, but I find the long rear radius inhibits tight pivots. Maybe my skating style is odd, but when I'm trying to turn a very tight circle to shake a forechecker, I lean hard into the heel of my blade. The long radius makes it much harder for me to make that tight pivot.

Ok, just kidding...I know many of the members here absolutely love quad profiles. I've tried a few different times and I literally can barely skate on them. I've been playing hockey for 45 years and played at a pretty high level, so I'm a decent skater. I find that I have zero agility on a quad. One thing that confuses me is the claim that the short front radius allows for tighter turns. I could see how this would be true for hard cuts when you're moving fast and leaning forward, but I find the long rear radius inhibits tight pivots. Maybe my skating style is odd, but when I'm trying to turn a very tight circle to shake a forechecker, I lean hard into the heel of my blade. The long radius makes it much harder for me to make that tight pivot.

Single, dual, quad... I think some very great players have played the game on all 3 and it didn't matter to them once they adapted to what they had.

It's like sticks, curves and lie... there's no one size fits all. Is Ovi's curve better because of his one timers, or is McDavid's better for his game? Neither because Crosby's nearly flat blade and short stick is superior... for his game.

You can be elite on a 10' single radius or elite on an 0.5 Quad.

Very good points, and I guess I could have selected a better topic title. Guess I'm really wondering if there is a flaw in my skating that is stopping me from adapting to the longer rear radius on a quad? The tight turns claim really does confuse me because like I said, for me, tight pivots are performed on the rear part of the blade.

IMHO, I think it's overrated in terms of being sold as a magic solution to your skating problems. You hear about people getting a new profile and when you ask why, they just shrug and repeat stuff the marketing brochure promises.

You should have an understanding of what issues you have with your skating and have plan for what you want to achieve with your profile. Simply getting some profile because it promises something special is buying into the marketing. A profile won't make you something you're not, but it can give you a boost in a specific area to help you along. But there's no free lunch. You're always giving up one thing for another. But the hope is you're gaining more in one area than you're giving up in another.

For example, I have small feet, and I find because of that, I'm a pretty agile, but I'm also little less stable. So, I sacrificed some of that agility for more glide and stability by going to a flatter profile. I don't miss the agility lose, but I do notice the gain in stability. Over time, I've slowly tweaked things to better fit what I want out of my skates. The profile spec is a bit crazy, but it works for me, but I doubt it will work for many others.

To date the studies done at Brock University on profile, Blade Pitch and Profiled vs not profiled are the most conclusive studies done by the same Professor. There are no independent studies done on Pro sharp profiles. Love to see some.

I ended up on a quad zero because I picked up a pair of 3S and figured I would give the "power profile" a shot. Due to COVID, there's no public skating available, so my only option was to go straight into a 4 on 4 game. I was fine going in a straight line, but that's about it. Drove straight to the shop afterwards and had them put a 10' on them. I may try a 9.5/10.5, but I'm done with quads, (this is my third attempt over the past few years).

Interesting comment on the crossover around the circles; the first time I tried a quad, I had this same exact experience. I literally almost fell over trying to do that drill. I also like to practice skating with my laces untied, but couldn't do it with that quad.

I like triple and quad profiles the most though. Again, longer profiles, ZuperiorM, or the Quad2 are preferred. I have tried to adopt the Quad0 but haven't been successful. The toe is a little too aggressive for me and I don't feel like the longer sections are long enough to provide me the speed and stability I am looking for.

Many times I think the biggest benefit from profiles is that most templates natively have pitch built into them which forces players into a proper stance and gets their weight over the balls of their feet. Many players have poor hockey posture without being aware of such and profiles help rectify this. I also think skates like TRUE, which also tend to force players into the proper hockey stance, yield the same benefits as well.

I found moving to the quad helped me with stability. The result of that was I could get to a shallower cut and with increased glide and helped me get more on top of the ice. I wouldn't go back. Very happy. Everyone has to find what works for them and that's the whole point of the profiles and the profiling project. Try stuff, see what works... etc.

Regarding pros, since I would say profiling is really coming into the mainstream discussion (and by mainstream still limited to a minority but more than when some people would have their blades "rockered"), I would think that the majority of players and equipment guys are still somewhat rooted in what they grew up with, but that could be changing, seems like some guys are working through the process but I would imagine it is somewhat determined by their EqM and maybe more driven by skating coaches.

Another aspect that I don't think has been tested is how long before steady state is established? Having a bunch of skaters swapping out profiles and running some tests may show quantitative performance data for someone who is new to a profile. What it doesn't show is how performance is affected in the longer term. There may be a learning period where the results are different. An expert skater may take time to really learn the nuances of a profile and the ability to wring every last bit of potential performance out of it. The problem is this is a process that takes a lot of time to collect that kind of data and very structured protocols (with enough participants representing each relevant variable, which also takes time to determine).

I've done a lot of usability testing for medical devices which includes a lot of GUI as well as physical UIs so I'm looking at this more as a geek. Testing can really validate or invalidate some strongly held assumptions. Initial performance vs. learned performance, external and internal perception of task performance vs. measured task performance. Not 100% apples to apples here but certainly some applicable overlap I think.

You know your stuff and I'm not a pro, not even close. All I can say is that switching to the QUAD 0.5 makes playing hockey easier for me and therefore I'm having more fun. I can stay on the ice longer as I don't have to do much to maintain speed. My crossovers are solid and more powerful. I feel solid on my feet. It feels way more natural then balancing on the single profile I had before(11'). I'm just excited about this profile. I don't remember feeling this way switch from a 13' to a 11' to a 9' etc.

The first time I skated on the QUAD 0.5 I liked it so much that I was literally mad that I wasted my time skating on a single profile for so long. So maybe it is best not to listen to me cause I'm a total fan boy at this point.

3a8082e126