Warrior G5

[RichMan]

19 hours ago, Pezon36 said:

Warrior just posted this picture. It looks like the calf strap Is going through the inner calf wrap. I wonder if this gives it a tighter feel?

Euro pro?

[Kirk3190]

On 2/2/2020 at 2:21 PM, Pezon36 said:

Warrior just posted this picture. It looks like the calf strap Is going through the inner calf wrap. I wonder if this gives it a tighter feel?

You are correct!

[Puckstopper]

Can the wrap still be worn around the calf wrap for the traditional looser fit if that's preferred?

[coopaloop1234]

53 minutes ago, Puckstopper said:

Can the wrap still be worn around the calf wrap for the traditional looser fit if that's preferred?

No, they've used super glue in that location to intentionally force you to use it this way.

[Puckstopper]

Well it would depend on the construction of the calf wrap, now wouldn't it?  As an example, if the foam behind the calf strap is rigid it would make the traditional method more difficult.

[WONGER]

Looks like the boot break is a bit more open, I'm guessing this is also means the pad is going to sit closer and move with your body better. 

[coopaloop1234]

1 hour ago, Puckstopper said:

Well it would depend on the construction of the calf wrap, now wouldn't it?  As an example, if the foam behind the calf strap is rigid it would make the traditional method more difficult.

Fair enough. I'm making a safe assumption that you'll be able to take it out of the calf wrap if you want, though I'm sure that it won't be necessary as you still have the option of loosening the calf velcro attachment to facilitate a more open leg channel.

43 minutes ago, WONGER said:

Looks like the boot break is a bit more open, I'm guessing this is also means the pad is going to sit closer and move with your body better. 

I'm curious as to where you're seeing that?

[WONGER]

15 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

I'm curious as to where you're seeing that?

Top left are my G4's 

[coopaloop1234]

42 minutes ago, WONGER said:

Top left are my G4's

Was wondering if you were Mr. Youtube or not. I see what you're getting at. I originally thought you were referring to the underside of the boot break.

Looks to be more open than my GT2 break, so you may be right. Could also be a bit of an optical illusion and it doesn't differ much from the GT2 either.

[Puckstopper]

The purple set on the previous page also look as though there is a little more room around the boot.   This seems like it might be the next big trend, as Axis also talks about a stiffer upper section with a softer, more flexible boot. 

[RichMan]

52 minutes ago, WONGER said:

Top left are my G4's 

The roll on the G4 in the pic seems more tapered at the connecting point whereas the G5 seems more cut square'ish. Right?

[coopaloop1234]

35 minutes ago, RichMan said:

The roll on the G4 in the pic seems more tapered at the connecting point whereas the G5 seems more cut square'ish. Right?

The G4 had a reduced outer roll near the boot break as Warrior was catering to the "boot inside post" RVH and allowing the pad to have a closer seal to the post.

It also connected the whole way through too.

[Kirk3190]

21 hours ago, Puckstopper said:

Can the wrap still be worn around the calf wrap for the traditional looser fit if that's preferred?

Yes

[Kirk3190]

Introducing CoverEDGE+

[cwarnar]

@Kirk3190 scooped all of us... What's your source???  LOL

[RichMan]

[coopaloop1234]

Doesn't this just seem like justification for making thicker gear? lol

[Teezle]

6 hours ago, Kirk3190 said:

Introducing CoverEDGE+

Some questions:

What differentiates this from just holding your glove/blocker out more in front of your body and/or angling it to the puck correctly to get the same inch of coverage?

Regarding the blocker, does this mean a thicker board, which tends to be heavier and worse in paddle-down scenarios?

If the top of the glove cuff comes forward more, such that there is a wedge-like incline on the cuff face, will this angle pucks that hit that area downward to the ice, instead of up and over the net/to the corners?

Last thing: these marketing graphics are not great at showcasing how it is different - it just looks like someone stuck a piece of blue plastic in front of the gear (which would give more coverage, but also is not a legal addition to your gear). It would be nice to showcase actual photos of the G4 glove and the G5 glove, point out what has changed and why it's an improvement.

Edited February 5, 2020 by Teezle

[HP29]

1 hour ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Doesn't this just seem like justification for making thicker gear? lol

I'm not sure the idea is making the gear THICKER, so much as it's building it out at a modified angle. I feel like showing that overlay image of CoverEDGE+ on top of a traditional build is to demonstrate contrast, not that it's adding bulk.

I could be way off, but this is how I'm interpreting what's been released.

@Kirk3190

Edited February 5, 2020 by HP29

[Teezle]

Another question - if the cuff face is now a wedge/at an angle, do you not need to give up some of the width in order to not exceed the 8" max? Similarly, if the whole face of the glove is angled forward, what was shrunk in order to keep the 45" perimeter? 

I could be missing something here, so I am curious as to how much effect this has past marketing hype.

[Puckstopper]

On 1/30/2020 at 10:06 AM, Kirk3190 said:

A similar conversation took place on GGSU the other day.  Here's a snippet from part of it in relation to this conversation.

 Several factors come into play when evaluating slide. To name a few others: bindingless boot, knee block stability, product weight etc. We recognized early on that others were in a race to slide faster, slide faster, slide faster.. essentially based on the premise of a material. The truth is pretty much every pad on the market slides exceptionally well now on clean ice. This set us on the direction of trying to not only achieve a fast sliding pad, but one that slid consistently fast over the course of a game as the ice starts to deteriorate. A lot of goalies grade "slide-ability" on a fresh sheet of ice right after the Zam gets off. But, the most important time of a game for a goalie is typically in the final minutes when the ice is in really bad shape. This lead us in the direction of AIRslide. A physical design that maintained the great slide-ability you have in warm-ups, at the end of the game as well.

This does jibe with my experience.  My GT2s are more consistent from the start of the game to the end of the game than my EF4s with SpeedSkin.  My biggest point was that retail customers are buying into the hype surrounding these materials and don't always factor in other parts of the design.  Similarly, you'll see a 250 lb beer leaguer buy low end pads and then be stunned that the less durable materials break down super quickly.  People don't always see the entire picture and aren't always willing to be educated. 

22 minutes ago, HP29 said:

I'm not sure the idea is making the gear THICKER, so much as it's building it out at a modified angle. I feel like showing that overlay image of CoverEDGE+ on top of a traditional build is to demonstrate contrast, not that it's adding bulk.

I could be way off, but this is how I'm interpreting what's been released.

@Kirk3190

That seems to be the case with the glove, but the blocker is clearly thicker.   The pads are a little harder to determine, as they actually look much thinner at the top to me. 

2 hours ago, Teezle said:

Regarding the blocker, does this mean a thicker board, which tends to be heavier and worse in paddle-down scenarios?

If there's one thing I'm not worried about it's Warrior gear being overly heavy.  The GT2 glove and blocker are by far the lightest I've ever used, so even if they regress to the mean a little bit with the G5 and all other companies get lighter this generation (unlikely) Warrior will probably be lighter or at worst equal to the competition. 

[Kirk3190]

There are a few comments above that pose some great questions so I'll do my best to "reply all" in a simple fashion.

The basic premise is goalies are always looking for ways to maximize their coverage.  30 years ago it was taught to "Get out of the blue paint! Challenge!" - Today that same philosophy is taught but it's commonly referred to as "Box Control".  The end goal is to fill as much net as possible.  Goalies also believe that if something is "NHL legal" with a tape measurer then it must be the maximum allowed coverage.  However, the same logic that applies to being forward in the crease also applies to how forward your gear is to the puck.  

Depth in the crease + Forward facing gear + static NHL measurements = Maximized coverage

You have to think of your gear from the pucks perspective, the same way you think about your position in the net from the pucks perspective.  It's pretty simple, if you have a reduced outer roll height you're giving up coverage.  If you have a super thin blocker board you're potentially missing a few pucks that just go by the edge of your blocker.  If your glove is slightly tilted forward it makes it square to the puck and fills more aerial coverage of the net.  Use the same thought process of 3-Dimensional depth in the crease towards thinking of your gear in 3-Dimensional ways.

I can assure you.  Weight is no issue for the R/G5.  Pete is a genius.  There's more info coming.  The GIFs we created were simply to inform goalies of what is coming and to begin discussions like these about the concept of CoverEDGE+.  "Filling more net" is not a new innovation.  Goalies have been trying to do it for decades.  We just thought logically about how your gear affects your coverage in the net.

[dualshowman]

3 hours ago, Kirk3190 said:

Depth in the crease + Forward facing gear + static NHL measurements + Incredible Reaction Time = Maximized coverage

There we go... all fixed!

[Chenner29]

8 hours ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Doesn't this just seem like justification for making thicker gear? lol

I love my gear thicc

[Dero]

4 hours ago, Kirk3190 said:

There are a few comments above that pose some great questions so I'll do my best to "reply all" in a simple fashion.

The basic premise is goalies are always looking for ways to maximize their coverage.  30 years ago it was taught to "Get out of the blue paint! Challenge!" - Today that same philosophy is taught but it's commonly referred to as "Box Control".  The end goal is to fill as much net as possible.  Goalies also believe that if something is "NHL legal" with a tape measurer then it must be the maximum allowed coverage.  However, the same logic that applies to being forward in the crease also applies to how forward your gear is to the puck.  

Depth in the crease + Forward facing gear + static NHL measurements = Maximized coverage

You have to think of your gear from the pucks perspective, the same way you think about your position in the net from the pucks perspective.  It's pretty simple, if you have a reduced outer roll height you're giving up coverage.  If you have a super thin blocker board you're potentially missing a few pucks that just go by the edge of your blocker.  If your glove is slightly tilted forward it makes it square to the puck and fills more aerial coverage of the net.  Use the same thought process of 3-Dimensional depth in the crease towards thinking of your gear in 3-Dimensional ways.

I can assure you.  Weight is no issue for the R/G5.  Pete is a genius.  There's more info coming.  The GIFs we created were simply to inform goalies of what is coming and to begin discussions like these about the concept of CoverEDGE+.  "Filling more net" is not a new innovation.  Goalies have been trying to do it for decades.  We just thought logically about how your gear affects your coverage in the net.

are you guys eligible to be used in the nhl now? i know u guys were not paying the fee because you believed you didn't need it but like what if a guy overseas uses ur gear and gets called to the nhl. im also confused how if u guys havent paid the fee, why guys are allowed to use warrior sticks.