Jump to content

Quick Mid / Bishop Twist/ Mrazek Wedge


Jonathon v

Recommended Posts

Shop GoalieMonkey.com Now!

I've used both the Quick-mid and Bishop-twist.  The Bishop is my curve on my current sticks and will be on my new sticks.  I have CR1s currently.

I play the puck a lot and I'm a good passer/zone clearer and the Bishop gets great loft and I'm able to saucer the puck with good velocity or flip the puck lob style with good ease.  The downside is less coverage on tight plays , say standing upright blade saves or lunging sideways butterfly stick saves. The blade isn't flat or square so you lose a bit of coverage.

The Quick , for me, was basically opposite.  Difficult and awkward with passing/clearing with almost no loft or saucer and difficult to flip the puck lob style.  But, far better coverage on saves or blocking with the blade because it's flat and square.

For me, it's Bishop all the way.  The Quick felt very flat and dead to me as an active puck handler and decent passer.

No experience with Mrazek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no clue what the Northstar G31 curve (Quick/Mid) and it's my favorite blade that I've ever used for shooting. I learned to shoot with this curve and I can shoot it as high as I like without an issue. 

@seagoal Basically all the issues you had are nonexistent for me.

G31.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ThatCarGuy said:

I have no clue what the Northstar G31 curve (Quick/Mid) and it's my favorite blade that I've ever used for shooting. I learned to shoot with this curve and I can shoot it as high as I like without an issue. 

@seagoal Basically all the issues you had are nonexistent for me.

G31.jpg

Fair enough.  That's totally reasonable.

My feedback was a comparative of Bishop and Quick curves for me, I'm not making any definitive statements on either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use a Price curve for years, it’s identical to the Mrazek - aka wedge.

It gives heaps of loft, easier to saucer than a mid curve, in my experience. 

The only thing I find is you need to be a little more active with your hands on hard dump ins. You can’t just jam the blade into the boards, otherwise it can be kind of unpredictable. You need to keep softer hands on those situations. 

Again, just my experience. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've used both the Quick and Bishop curves on my CR/2's, and definitely prefer the Bishop. I'm a fairly aggressive puck handler, and I find the Bishop curve lets me get a lot more mustard when I'm sending a bomb, and much more control when I'm picking the puck off the boards or skating out to play it.

I've never noticed any significant difference between the five-hole coverage between my Quick and Bishop curves, probably because those situations where the inch-or-so extra coverage that a flatter blade gives don't come up very often. The comparative flatness of the Quick curve does make it easier to play the puck on your backhand, if you care about that.

Come to think of it, one thing I did notice about the Quick curve is that it doesn't do a great job of sending the puck into the rafters. From time to time, when I'd move my stick to ramp the puck out of play as it was coming low to my glove side, the puck would only lift about a foot-and-a-half off the ice (right into my glove, thankfully). Hasn't happened to me with the Bishop curve, but that might just be my own personal quirk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Xdave90x said:

Price or mrazek

I'm sorry, but this is incorrect.  I use P31 with Bauer, Crawford in CCM and Bishop in Warrior.  Those 3 patterns are virtually identical with a curve that starts in the middle of the blade and a somewhat open toe twist.   Price and Quick are similar (slightly open heel curve) and Price 2018 and Mrazek are similar to the previous two, but with a more open face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jonathon v said:

Does anyone know what would be most similar to the stock 2s pro curve. I believe its pp31 or p31 

Warrior doesn’t have a P31 style in composite. 

If you like the P31 because it’s a big curve, go bishop. If you like P31 because it’s a heel oriented curve, go Mrazek 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TheGoalNet said:

Warrior doesn’t have a P31 style in composite. 

If you like the P31 because it’s a big curve, go bishop. If you like P31 because it’s a heel oriented curve, go Mrazek 

Unfortunately I am a full right weirdo goalie so literally they have zero Bishop it mrazek curves that I can find right now. That’s why I was wondering if the price curve is kinda similar cause I was gonna maybe try that ccm Eflex stick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Price curve on the EF4 is the new Price 2018 curve.  It's close to a Mrazek, but not exactly the same.   It's a bigger heel curve with a more open face than a Quick curve for sure.   I'll get pics the next time I work (some time next week) or stop by the store. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jonathon v said:

Unfortunately I am a full right weirdo goalie so literally they have zero Bishop it mrazek curves that I can find right now. That’s why I was wondering if the price curve is kinda similar cause I was gonna maybe try that ccm Eflex stick

As a fellow weirdo have a look at the Crawford CCM little more curve than the P31

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Puckstopper said:

The Price curve on the EF4 is the new Price 2018 curve.  It's close to a Mrazek, but not exactly the same.   It's a bigger heel curve with a more open face than a Quick curve for sure.   I'll get pics the next time I work (some time next week) or stop by the store. 

This is actually the same curve Price uses in the NHL now. I have had it for the last year. The blade is flatter, the toe is square, and there's much less curve to it. In Warrior speak, it falls between a Mrazek and a Quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started with the Quick curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I tried the Mrazek curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I am going to try the Bishop next, and it will still probably suck at playing the puck.  Wait, its because IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII suck at playing the puck.  A certain curve isn't going to all of a sudden make you play the puck like Price or Smith.  Practicing playing the puck will help you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

I started with the Quick curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I tried the Mrazek curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I am going to try the Bishop next, and it will still probably suck at playing the puck.  Wait, its because IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII suck at playing the puck.  A certain curve isn't going to all of a sudden make you play the puck like Price or Smith.  Practicing playing the puck will help you.

Thumbs up mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, seagoal said:

Ha :)

This thread wasn't about a curve making anyone better.....but your point is totally valid .

This has all been about just the differences in the curves.

Several members stated using one curve and saying they felt they played the puck better with another curve.  I gave my experiences with two of the mentioned curves.  I then made a jab at myself because I know I suck at shooting the puck.  Why is that any different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

Several members stated using one curve and saying they felt they played the puck better with another curve.  I gave my experiences with two of the mentioned curves.  I then made a jab at myself because I know I suck at shooting the puck.  Why is that any different?

It's not different, I suppose. Stating your experience was fine.

Here's what the rest of your post sounded like:  Curves don't matter to me because I am bad at playing the puck.  So therefore, this conversation about curves is silly because you should be practicing playing the puck and you should stop caring about curves (and it sorta implied the original question was: which curve will make me better at playing the puck?).

I was just reacting to that and in good fun and with humor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SaveByRichter35 said:

I started with the Quick curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I tried the Mrazek curve.  It sucked for playing the puck.  I am going to try the Bishop next, and it will still probably suck at playing the puck.  Wait, its because IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII suck at playing the puck.  A certain curve isn't going to all of a sudden make you play the puck like Price or Smith.  Practicing playing the puck will help you.

Sure, the curve doesn't make you a good or bad puck handler, but it does play a part in how the puck behaves when you handle it. Closed-face will settle the puck down more quickly and reliably than open-face, but open-face lifts the puck easier than closed-face. Mid- and toe-curves create more distinct "zones" on the blade for where you want the puck when stickhandling, shooting, and passing, than do heel-curves. Stronger curves trade more control on the forehand for less control on the backhand.

What curve is "right" for a goalie depends entirely on how they interact with the puck. Do you stickhandle the puck frequently? Long or short passes? On ice, saucy, or bombs? Do you play chicken with forecheckers? Do you skate with the puck? How do you hold your stick? How much do you bend your knees? Where are your shoulders?

And once you start asking those questions you can't just limit yourself to the curve of your stick. You need to take a look at the flex and lie, the height of the shaft, the size of your knob (the one on the top of your stick, pervert :P ).

But if you're looking for the most "neutral" pattern possible, it would probably be a shallow, closed mid-curve with a square toe. That should be the most forgiving, in that if you really botch the sauce you (probably) won't send the puck into the press box, and the puck won't deflect unpredictably off of the blade.

Speaking very generally: if someone is looking to maximize their ICBP's (Intercontinental Ballistic Passes) you'd want to look at a deep, open heel-curve, with a stiffer shaft and lower lie, so you can really lean into your stick. Short-range sauce would be better served by a shallower, open heel-curve, (or a deeper, open mid-curve) with a whippier shaft and higher lie, to make it easier to handle the puck closer to your body (or behind the net) and complete those quick, precise passes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...