Blade/spinning problems, please help!

[skatergirl_96]

Hi guys,

I'm new here and I hope you can help me with something. First of all I'll tell you a bit about myself. I'm 25 years old and I've been skating since I was 13. I've never participated in competitions before, but I'd like to do this in the near future and I want to start working towards this goal from now on. I've always secretly had this ambition to compete and I wanted to do this much sooner, but I didn't have enough self-confidence, because in all those years of skating I've made little to no progress.

Thankfully I've made a lot more progress in the past year, because I have more ice time and I'm much more motivated. I currently take one hour group lessons 3 times a week. My jumps have improved and I'm working on single lutz atm. Furthermore I do stuff like spirals, mohawk variations, I+O three turns, F+B crossovers, twizzles, crossrolls, which is going pretty well. However, I still struggle a lot with my spins. I keep falling out of my left outside entry-edge, which is causing my spins to travel. I don't understand how to get the right posture and which muscles you have to use to hold that edge.
I also have a hard time finding the 'sweet spot' on my blades. I can successfully hold an one foot spin for multiple rotations and with much effort I can hold a sit spin for a few rotations. But when I attempt a camel spin, I barely get 2 rotations. I feel like i'm not able to stand stable on the sweet spot and I either go too much to the back or to the front and drag my toepick. My back spin is the most dramatic of all, I fall out of it after 1 rotation. If I attempt one on the spinner it feels pretty stable and I can hold the position for multiple rotations with speed. I can do the entry-edge, but when I try to stretch my body to get into the H-position, I either go too much to the front and drag my toepick or I go too much to the back and almost fall. I have been struggling with the back-scratch spin for years and it makes me depressed.

I've done some research and read that this spinning-problem could be related to the type of blades you're using. I then took a good look at my blades (Jackson Ultima legacy 8 ) and I was shocked when I noticed that there was some kind of dent on the spin rocker (see photo 1 and 2). I haven't had them sharpened very often, but when I did I took them to a professional or what I thought to be a pro. It turns out that there have been several complaints about that shop, but I didn't know that in advance and besides that I didn't know anything about blades. I recently took them to a real pro and asked if my blades could be saved. They have tried to sharpen the blades more evenly (see photo 3 and 4). I was hoping this would make a difference but I still have the same problem when I spin. My coach says that my body had adapted to the bad blades and that my body now has to get used to the blades again after they got sharpened. I've compared my blade to my friend's who has MK galaxy's and the lift angle of her blade seems to be higher than mine (see last photo). Maybe this is also an indication that my spin rocker is no longer sufficient?

I've enjoyed skating so much since last year and I would like to work towards competitions, but it's so frustrating that my spins aren't improving. I've had these blades for six years now and I don't know if the problem is related to my blades. Before my current skates I had Jackson Classiques, which came with pre-mounted basic blades, so I have nothing to compare it to. Do you think it is time for new blades and if so, which blades do you recommend for me? (I do like the 8 ft rocker on this blade, but again I've nothing to compare them with since I've never had any other blade except the ones that came with the Jackson skates). I wouldn't mind investing in better blades, but I also don't want to just buy new blades if the're likely not the problem. I've read that the gold seal blade has an aggressive spin rocker. Would this help with spinning?
I'd love to hear your opinions/advice about this!! 

[Bill_S]

It does look like your sharpener has been hitting the area behind the toe pick aggressively compared to the rest of the blade. It has re-shaped your blade as you suspect and I don't know if your blades can be salvaged.

I think that you should shop for new blades even though the rest of the blade length has lots of life. Life is too short to deal with something questionable.

Personally, I couldn't spin on Jackson blades when I purchased, mounted and  measured many pairs of different blades a few years ago. (Confession - I had been using Coronation Aces up to that point, and the British blades have a different spin rocker than Jacksons. It could be that I was just used to the British feel.) I could spin better on Gold Seal, Pattern 99, and MK Pro blades. I could not spin on dance blades, nor the Jacksons that I tried.

I settled on Pattern 99 blades for now. I still have the MK Pros and Gold Seals at home to mount and use if I want to. Gold Seals have a complex blade shape that can be challenging for shops not equipped to sharpen them properly. My advice is to get either MK Pros or the more expensive Pattern 99 blades.

And switch to a better sharpener.

[Loops]

Hello!  I second everything Bill said.  Life's too short to trouble shoot those blades.  I would add Coronation Ace's into the mix.  MK Pro's and Corornation Ace's are the standard entry-level competition blade.  Pattern 99's are great blades, as are the Gold Seal and Phantom's, but at your level you don't really need to spend that much. 

I've skated on both Pro's and CorAces.  I'm currently on Coronations, and I like them a lot.  Both models have spin rockers that are easy enough to find.

Don't get me wrong, Jackson make fine blades (and have better quality control than MK/Wilson).  But I will probably replace my Coronations with a new pair of Coronations when the time comes.

[tstop4me]

Your spin rockers are supposed to be convex out (curving outwardly away from the sole).  Your sharpener butchered your blades.  Your spin rockers are concave in (curving inwardly towards the sole).  There's no way to repair these short of grinding down the rest of the blades and trimming your drag picks.  Not worth it; there will likely be little (if any) edge life left.

If you want to continue on an intermediate blade with an 8' main rocker, the Jackson Ultima Legacy 8 is your only current choice.  The only other option I'm aware of is the discontinued Wilson Coronation Comet (8.5' main rocker).  Still available on some websites, but I wouldn't recommend that you re-train on a discontinued blade. 

Jackson Ultima blades have a flatter spin rocker and lower heel lift than Wilson and MK blades to begin with.  If you want a more pronounced spin rocker and higher heel lift, and are willing to switch to an intermediate blade with a 7' main rocker, then Wilson Coronation Ace or MK Professional are suitable.  If you want a more pronounced spin rocker, and want to keep an 8' main rocker, then the advanced Wilson Gold Seal or Wilson Pattern 99 are suitable. 

Jackson Ultima and Riedell Eclipse blades that are "comparable to" the Gold Seal and Pattern 99 actually have flatter spin rockers and lower heel lifts.  Paramount maintains the same pronounced spin rockers and high heel lifts.  In the past, Paramount blades have required special jigs for sharpening, but they claim to have redesigned them with wider runners to allow easier sharpening.  You should check with a trusted tech to verify this; if so, this is a good option.  The Paramount version of the Gold Seal does not have the complex geometry (tapered thickness and concave side honing) that makes sharpening genuine Wilson Gold Seals difficult.  [I previously skated on Coronation Ace and am currently on the Paramount version of Gold Seal.]

Whichever blade you choose, make sure that you have access to a competent sharpener with experience sharpening that particular blade.

[Kaitsu]

There is not so much what to add to previous advices, but here are anyhow few comments.

Uneven edges and really deep hollow does not have spins any easier, but most likely they are not root cause for your problems.

What comes to butchered blades, I added line to your photo to visualize the issue.
My advice to people is that they should measure touch point lengths and heel lift when they buy blades. In your blades touch point length is much longer than in mentioned competitor blades. I would say that in your blades touch point length is over 50 mm (>2") and heel lift might be just 15mm even blades would be new. You already have noted this very low heel lift when you compared your blades to your fried blades. Usually I recommend people that heel lifts should be about 19-23mm in new blades, if they want to have similar blades with John Wilson (not valid for Gold Seal).

Longer the touch point length is, less you have heel lift and opposite. Touch point will escape further from toe picks in every sharpening which means that also your heel lift reduces in every sharpening. Except its compensated with grinding also toe pick. Longer the touch point length means usually also flatter spinning rocker. Some people like more flatter spinning rocker and some like very curvy spinning rocker like in Gold Seals. Profiles between different blade manufacturers can be also very close to each other, but there is significant difference in touch point lengths.

Only measuring touch point lengths and heel lifts from the different blades you will learn a lot about the blades. In your blades, pay attention how close to touch point the concave shape goes. When the concave shape is close enough to touch point, your spins starts to travel. Its the same as you would try to spin ping pong ball with the area which has dent. It wont spin nicely in one place.

[Query]

I'm amazed you could spin at all on those blades, when for all intents and purposes, you had a spot that does the exact opposite of what a sweet spot is supposed to do.

Just so you know, the "touch point length" on all the Ultima blades I've looked at is quite deliberately shorter than on most MK and Wilson blades. That is partly a matter of taste, and there are people who are used to and/or prefer the Ultima blades. It is also conceivable - I'm not all that sure of this, that it might work particularly well on people with fairly short toes, because that might place the sweet spot under the ball of their foot.

So the short touch point length of Ultima blades is not a manufacturing defect - it's a design difference. Which your skate tech probably made worse, possibly as part of an attempt to avoid trimming the toe pick, which they perhaps didn't know how to do right.

If you were doing your own sharpening, it might indeed be worth it to trim the drag pick (the pick closest to the back), and re-shape the rest of the blade. A good skate tech (sharpener) - which yours doesn't seem to be - could do that too, though whether that is worth the cost, given the limited lifetime left, is up to you. In practice, you would still have a somewhat altered change in the relationship of your toe pick to the rest of your blade. If you can afford it, new blades would be worth it.

But, as far as I can tell, and as Kaitsu pointed out, even your "real pro" didn't do a good job, and probably isn't all that knowledgeable about sharpening figure skates. You don't want the curvature to be even - though they did worse than that. I admit I probably can't spin as well as you, so am not an expert on spinning, but, from discussions with other people, you want there to be a fairly sudden increase in curvature (which is what the sweet spot should be) beneath the ball of your foot (assuming that is where you spin and turn, because most people find it easiest to balance near there), so you can feel the change, and know that you are there. The change also makes it easier to spin there in general, just as the place at the center of the bottom of a top, where it changes shape, is easiest to spin on. I don't know where the ball of your foot is, but if the ball of your foot (or wherever you try to balance) is where the boot bends upwards, the "real pro" tried to create a new sweet spot is too far forwards. And your "real pro" should have trimmed the back toe pick, if he/she actually understood sharpening figure skates, and not left a concave portion.

BTW, you didn't say what area you live in. You might ask other skaters and your coach if there is an even better skate tech (including sharpening) in your area. Don't be surprised if some of them drive for hours, maybe even carpool, or have one person carry several people's skates, to get there. Maybe some of them mail their skates back and forth to a good skate tech. (Though it would probably be better to speak to the tech in person rather than having someone else do it, test the blades out, and bring them back to the tech, if you didn't like the results, at least for the first sharpening.) If you don't use a good one, they will gradually mess up any new blades you buy - and you are no longer buying cheap blades.

Maybe a few people in your area, like the people who have so far responded to you, do their own sharpening. Unfortunately, it takes time and practice to learn to do that well - so if you can find someone who is really good, they are probably worth using.

AFAIK, Gold Seal blades are generally agreed to be quite difficult to sharpen well, because the portion of the blade where the blade clamp used with the sharpening machine grips the blade is not flat and parallel. It is quite possible that neither of the people who you have used could do a good job of it, even at first.

[tstop4me]

Just so you know, the "touch point length" on all the Ultima blades I've looked at is quite deliberately shorter than on most MK and Wilson blades. That is partly a matter of taste, and there are people who are used to and/or prefer the Ultima blades. It is also conceivable - I'm not all that sure of this, that it might work particularly well on people with fairly short toes, because that might place the sweet spot under the ball of their foot.

So the short touch point length of Ultima blades is not a manufacturing defect - it's a design difference. Which your skate tech probably made worse, possibly as part of an attempt to avoid trimming the toe pick, which they perhaps didn't know how to do right.

As shown in Kaitsu's second photo in his Reply #4 above, what he refers to as "touch point length" is the distance between the tip of the drag pick and the tangent point of the spin rocker.  Compared to Wilson and MK blades, Jackson Ultima blades have a flatter spin rocker.  A flatter spin rocker corresponds to a longer, not shorter, "touch point length" and a lower heel lift. 

[tstop4me]

But, as far as I can tell, and as Kaitsu pointed out, even your "real pro" didn't do a good job, and probably isn't all that knowledgeable about sharpening figure skates. You don't want the curvature to be even - though they did worse than that. I admit I probably can't spin as well as you, so am not an expert on spinning, but, from discussions with other people, you want there to be a fairly sudden increase in curvature (which is what the sweet spot should be) beneath the ball of your foot (assuming that is where you spin and turn, because most people find it easiest to balance near there), so you can feel the change, and know that you are there. The change also makes it easier to spin there in general, just as the place at the center of the bottom of a top, where it changes shape, is easiest to spin on. I don't know where the ball of your foot is, but if the ball of your foot (or wherever you try to balance) is where the boot bends upwards, the "real pro" tried to create a new sweet spot is too far forwards. And your "real pro" should have trimmed the back toe pick, if he/she actually understood sharpening figure skates, and not left a concave portion.

I don't think it's accurate to say (and I don't read Kaitsu's post as pointing out) that the second tech "didn't do a good job".  It is true that the second tech did not restore the profile of the spin rocker from concave to convex.  But, as I pointed out, to do that you would have to reprofile the whole blade down to the bottom of the concave section and trim the drag pick; and that's assuming there's enough hardened zone and drag pick available to do that.  It's possible that the second tech fixed it up as reasonably as he could, but the blades just can't be restored.

[Kaitsu]

I don't think it's accurate to say (and I don't read Kaitsu's post as pointing out) that the second tech "didn't do a good job".

This is true. I used After 2 photo only because it was showing most clearly the "butcher problem". View angles in other pictures are so much different, that its impossible to me say if blades has gone significantly more bad condition in the latest sharpening. Most likely they have been ruined already in the previous sharpening s.

[Query]

I don't think it's accurate to say (and I don't read Kaitsu's post as pointing out) that the second tech "didn't do a good job".  It is true that the second tech did not restore the profile of the spin rocker from concave to convex.  But, as I pointed out, to do that you would have to reprofile the whole blade down to the bottom of the concave section and trim the drag pick; and that's assuming there's enough hardened zone and drag pick available to do that.  It's possible that the second tech fixed it up as reasonably as he could, but the blades just can't be restored.

My various Ultima blades have a much shorter roll between the sweet spot and drag pick than the Coronation Ace and MK Dance blades (not that either of those blades is exactly comparable to what she is using) I used before. It's not just the curvature - it's also the distance between the drag pick and the sweet spot, and the height of the toepick relative to the spin rocker curve. There are a fair number of parameters to vary. And that's a reason why she might have trouble switching from  Ultima blades to MK or JW blades. I had a lot of trouble going the other direction. We really aren't able to know how hard it will be for her - her coach might be better suited for that guess.

As far as the large number of changes needed to restore the profile - that is actually what he arguably should have done - if he wanted to restore the critical spin rocker section, and its relationship to the rest of the blade, including the overall forward/backwards tilt. And that's why it would have had a limited lifetime - because the remaining section probably isn't as hard.

There is mixed information on exactly how far up the edge-hardened zone goes. One person previously connected with a blade company (I think it was MK) said it went somewhat higher than the chrome relief zone, perhaps 3/8" total - but it is reasonable to assume the change is somewhat gradual, and that if you removed that much metal, the remaining steel would therefore be softer. (Also, MK is a different brand, and that person worked at MK before the merger with JW, so that comment might not apply.)

If the blade were mine, that kind of change is what I would maybe have done - to get every last bit of lifetime I could out of the blade. But if the o.p. is paying people to do the work, it might not be worth it.

Also, the skate would be a little less high over the ice. And the remainder of the drag pick would be further forward than the untrimmed pick. So the overall shape would be changed. Possibly the blade should have been re-mounted a bit backwards, to keep the same touch point for the drag pick - which would move the sweet spot further forwards, necessitating additional change. And re-shimmed to compensate for the height loss.

For many skaters, there is a tradeoff between the time and cost of lessons and the cost of equipment. Overall, it's questionable whether whether doing that amount of work, paid to a professional, is a good idea in her case. She is apparently putting a lot of time and effort - and therefore probably money - into getting better rapidly. She implies she can afford new blades - and against what she is probably spending to get better, the blades may not be worth saving. E.g., if she is spending what most coaches charge for private lessons, a relatively small number of such lessons - spent on learning to use imperfectly shaped blades, which don't have much lifetime left in any event- would pay for new blades. Add in the cost of ice time, and the cost of traveling to and from the rink and skate tech, and the equipment cost, while it might seem high to some of us, is actually a relatively small part of the total cost of skating - at least if you are doing what it takes to make rapid progress.

I do not fully understand how her original skate tech created the shape shown in the first 2 pictures. I think right next to the drag pick might be about right for an original blade, though I've never used that particular style blade. Maybe the skate tech sharpened fairly close to that portion, removing metal in a flattened spin rocker, to avoid touching the toe pick. Then maybe they started moving the furthest forward sharpened portion back on the blade, to keep avoiding touching the toe pick, creating the concave shape. That sort of makes sense, though it is questionable practice. What I don't understand is why the chrome relief area (if it is chrome) - has so much more left in the back than in the front. (And it roughly matches the part nearest the toe pick - which, if a typical wheel was used, with no additional cross-grinding - might never have been re-sharpened after the factory - It's as though almost all the sharpening was done in the front, and relatively little was removed in the back. I don't understand why someone would do that. The shape makes no sense to me, no matter what the skate tech was trying to accomplish. Sometimes hockey skate techs deliberately do selectively more sharpening in the front, to move the center balance  forwards - though only for offensive players who spend most of the time skating forwards - but that's a completely different case, and one a relatively poorly trained skate tech might not know about. So I just don't get that.

[tstop4me]

My various Ultima blades have a much shorter roll between the sweet spot and drag pick than the Coronation Ace and MK Dance blades (not that either of those blades is exactly comparable to what she is using) I used before.

* Do your "various Ultima blades" refer only to the discontinued Matrix I blades you've previously discussed?  Or to more recent models as well?

* What do you now mean by "a much shorter roll between the sweet spot and drag pick"?  Touch point length?  Heel lift?  Something else?

[Kaitsu]

I believe Query is more familiar with this kind of blades / spin rockers.

[Query]

* Do your "various Ultima blades" refer only to the discontinued Matrix I blades you've previously discussed?  Or to more recent models as well?

* What do you now mean by "a much shorter roll between the sweet spot and drag pick"?  Touch point length?  Heel lift?  Something else?

They were indeed the older Matrix I blades. They included 3 models - Supreme (an advanced freestyle blade I probably shouldn't use, because the toe pick is quite aggressive), Dance, and Synchro. I do not know whether the rocker profiles changed between the original Matrix (sometimes called by others Matrix I) and the current Matrix (sometimes called by others Matrix 2). When I called Jackson to find that out, the people I spoke to weren't sure, but at least one of them thought they hadn't. (I'm puzzled too that they wouldn't know. I don't believe they were trying to hide the info - they acted like they just didn't know.) Do you happen to know?

And to some extent, I do mean something quite different by a shorter roll - i.e., less angular change of my foot. Which, of course, a longer spin rocker radius, like Ultima typically has, does tend to give, though there are other factors.

But there was something (I'm not sure where it is/was anymore) published on the Internet regarding the use of the devices like Broadbent's Rocker Wellness Gauge, which measure what you are calling a touch point length, on Ultima blades - that noted that even new Ultima blades did poorly according to such devices. Some people may interpret this as meaning that Ultima blades are no good. But others, who love particular Ultima blades, might disagree.

Some of the higher end skate techs try to customize things like spin rocker radius, and distance between the toe pick and sweet spot (which I think you prefer to call something like a rocker radius transition point)  to individual skaters. They experiment, with those skaters, trying out blade shapes to see what gives the best performance. But that is a expensive to do (both in time, metal removed, and in some cases, extra blades purchased), and requires a certain level of expertise from the skate tech. Skate Science implies they did that with their blades using high level competitors. So does Yamaichi in the link that Kaitsu cited in reply #12 of this thread.

Some people, like Broadbent, have played with adjustable toe pick heights, which is an idea I really love, though I've never had any of those blades. That doesn't adjust the spin rocker radius or the sweet spot, but it indirectly affects the touch point length, and the amount of angular roll needed to move between the sweet spot and toe pick. I'm not clear why they didn't become popular.

It would be really cool if someone made an affordable CNC device that could profile figure skating blades, or custom cut them, to adjust all those things, according to user inputs. A skate tech told me that the computerized CAG machines can re-profile figure skates to some extent - but I'm not sure how adjustable they are (e.g., can they re-cut toe picks), and they aren't cheap. They seem to be more popular among hockey skaters. Ideally, they should also make affordable blade blanks available to use with it.

Anyway, none of these things are going to help the original poster. Among other things she wants to know whether to switch blade styles to Gold Seals. Though it might interest her that less angular roll is used with the flatter spin rockers on many Ultima blades, which in turn means she needs better accuracy in forward/backwards foot tilt angle adjustment, but probably less foot point flexibility. Whereas if she switches to Gold Seals, the forwards/back foot tilt angle might not be quite as critical, and she might need more foot point flexibility. That's why I'm suggesting that her coach would probably know best whether it is a good risk for her - but that it is possible neither of the skate techs she has used is competent to do a good job with them. (Maybe they don't even have the right equipment to do so. Perhaps her coach would know those things too.)

[Query]

Wait! I could be very wrong in interpreting what the skate techs did.

Given that most skaters are taught to turn and spin on a point near the ball of their foot, and are taught that all or most of the turn or spin should not involve the toe pick, because that slows down the turn or spin (though some coaches do teach people to briefly touch the toe pick, then back off; also note that I am not an advanced skater, so maybe advanced technique is different), it is essential that the point that is on the ice near the ball of the foot be behind the touch point. Otherwise the toe pick would touch as the skater rotates through turns and spins.

The reshaping of the blade may have been done to try to insure that the touch point remains far enough back to do that. Maybe even the concave portion was deliberately created with that in mind.

And the original poster's trouble spinning might occur because the touch point is no longer far enough back to make that possible.

Is that plausible?

Yes, you can do that instead by trimming the toe pick, and I've sometimes done that. But I mostly view the toe pick as a pain in the neck that gets in the way, because I was taught by ice dancers to almost never use it. (Exception: pivots.) However, freestyle skaters use the toe pick during jumps, to help them vault into the air.

Perhaps her skate techs did not want to trim the toe pick, so she can continue to vault efficiently into the air.

In other words, maybe her skate techs aren't as bad as I assume.

incidentally, I and others stated here that if you remove too much metal, you reach soft steel, that needs sharpening more often. But could that info be out of date? In particular see my recent post - reply #16 at https://skatingforums.com/index.php?topic=8651.msg104702#msg104702 where I ask whether the shift in recent time to manufacturing blades by laser cutting might conceivably have changed that.