or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › The relationship between sub-optimal boot geometry and BACKSEAT SKIING!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The relationship between sub-optimal boot geometry and BACKSEAT SKIING! - Page 2  

post #31 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by BushwackerinPA View Post

I think that if a boot is a couple shell size to big...which I see everyday....it is then 100 percent a boot issue. To anyone who think differently go put on some boots that are to big and try to ski.

 

with that said tons of people ski on properly fitted boots and still ski back seat.



Definitely a rental issue and since comfort is not fully understood that gets in the way of a more beneficial fit.  People in big soft boots just have way too much range of motion and little control over any of it.  We tell them to move forward , they rock forwards with their shoulders and the backside heads the other way flexing all the way.

Man, that sounds kinda Christmas -ish. Anyway sloppy boots suck big time  but it's what they serve .

post #32 of 127

 Is the boot 100% at fault for the back seat skier. I say no. Vitimin Ski is on the right track. But there are still some of those rear entry boots out there which lack support and will put a skier further back. A boot that has to much forward lean( do to dissign or wedges/spoilers ) may also cause a skier to bend sharply in the ankles but the skier may try to compensate with the straight spine or upright postion thus putting them in the back seat. The key is to find a proper fitting shell and a flex index the matches your ability to flex it. Back seat skiers are gererally a result of lack of proper training. A good drill for fore and aft balance is to ski with your boot buckles wide open. If you are in the back seat you will know it. Have fun!!! Tek Head, Mount Washington B.C.   

post #33 of 127

Wow! how have I missed this thread until now?....

 

 

This is exactly why I have been advocating TAPP skier analysis model!  As instructors tend to pick one area and fixate on it, the fact is the real cause could originate in any one of four areas, Technique, Alignment, Psychological, or Physiological.

 

A skier could be in the back seat because they don't know any better which could be a simple movement adjustment (Technique) 

 

or

 

There could be and issue with their ramp angle, forward lean angle, delta angle, binding mount position or a combination thereof. (Alignment)

 

or

 

they could be fearful and digging their heels in. or have the intent of "not going there" (Psycho)

 

or

 

they could have flexibility issues or strength issues  (Physio)

 

We have to look at the whole picture (TAPP) to identify the real cause of what we see!

post #34 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post





 Beginners are often in the backseat because it's a natural fear reaction to skis accelerating down the fall line even when boots fit well. 



 

I resemble that remark.

post #35 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarryZ View Post



Definitely a rental issue and since comfort is not fully understood that gets in the way of a more beneficial fit.  People in big soft boots just have way too much range of motion and little control over any of it.  We tell them to move forward , they rock forwards with their shoulders and the backside heads the other way flexing all the way.

Man, that sounds kinda Christmas -ish. Anyway sloppy boots suck big time  but it's what they serve .



Garry, I have to say that I agree with you on this one.  There was another thread someone started trying to find out why their quads were burning, considering that they were in relatively good shape.  I had a similar experience last year - insane leg fatigue for a relatively fit person - and didn't really know what to do or how to fix it.  Of course, everyone could be a bit more fit, but I didn't think that the equipment set-up would have that much of an impact. 


I remember thinking, "ooo these boots are comfortable" when I was trying them on.  I had been snowboarding the last few years and maybe just didn't realize that comfortable rental boots probably means that they aren't fit for sh*t.  Live and learn, I guess.

 

post #36 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post


 



 

Not trying to put you down buddy; especially not like that.

 

Was more trying to put my experience in perspective for poster who thought I was a beginner.

 

 

 

 

Not my fight, but I'd assume when someone has nearly 10,000 posts like BW, it's very easy to check their posting history before tossing bombs their way. Because of the nature of the original post, one could have easily assumed the same of you, but the question was simple (the '100%' thing) and my original answer commensurately so. With 20+ years of experience, the question could have been more along the line of, "given many skiers propensity for back seat driving, to what degree might this be attributed toward boot fit/equipment issues vs. coaching? If you have any experience as an instructor, coach, or boot fitter, what's your take and your experience in rendering diagnosis?" 
 

 

post #37 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Is back-seat skiing 100% a function of bad boot geometry (forward lean, ramp angle, sizing, etc)???


No, but bad boot geometry can be a contributing factor, making it less likely that the skier will naturally fall into the correct position.

 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post



Actually, the apparaturs holding you to the slope and dictating your plane against gravitational and other forces is the boot clicked into the binding.

 

That IS the variable for choosing which seat you want to ride in.

That would be true if it were not for the fact that most skiers do not have fused knees and hips.

 

I've had to rent sloppy boots to finish the day while breaking in new boots.  It sucks, but it doesn't force me into the back seat. 
 

 

post #38 of 127

Regardless of what kind of boots you have, it is poor technique to focus too much force on the collar of the boots versus what you're doing with the ball and arches of your feet along the footbed.  Using the tops of the boot as a lever to balance yourself/brace yourself results in poor fore/aft management. Even when pressing the knees and hands forward to avoid the back seat one should be pushing the toes and balls of your feet while keeping the shin on the tongue. 

post #39 of 127


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post

Wow! how have I missed this thread until now?....

 

 

This is exactly why I have been advocating TAPP skier analysis model!  As instructors tend to pick one area and fixate on it, the fact is the real cause could originate in any one of four areas, Technique, Alignment, Psychological, or Physiological.

 

A skier could be in the back seat because they don't know any better which could be a simple movement adjustment (Technique) 

 

or

 

There could be and issue with their ramp angle, forward lean angle, delta angle, binding mount position or a combination thereof. (Alignment)

 

or

 

they could be fearful and digging their heels in. or have the intent of "not going there" (Psycho)

 

or

 

they could have flexibility issues or strength issues  (Physio)

 

We have to look at the whole picture (TAPP) to identify the real cause of what we see!

Thanks Bud. There is much to look for and often it's the combinations of these elements that send the skier out of whack. Once they are out on the hill you have to deal with the issues you can control and live with the rest .
 

 

post #40 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post


No, but bad boot geometry can be a contributing factor, making it less likely that the skier will naturally fall into the correct position.

 

That would be true if it were not for the fact that most skiers do not have fused knees and hips.

 

I've had to rent sloppy boots to finish the day while breaking in new boots.  It sucks, but it doesn't force me into the back seat. 
 

 


You will also undoubtedly make compensatory movements to compensate should the angles be less than ideal.  These compensations, however small, are still detracting from optimal efficient skiing.  Also a softer, loose fitting boot lends itself well to allowing compensations for poor angles because it is SOFT & LOOSE FITTING, unfortunately those same characteristics are detrimental to good skiing.

 

post #41 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by GarryZ View Post


 

Thanks Bud. There is much to look for and often it's the combinations of these elements that send the skier out of whack. Once they are out on the hill you have to deal with the issues you can control and live with the rest .
 

 



Ah yes you are correct GarryZ but as a good coach it is your  job as a "general practitioner" of skiing to correctly diagnose the true cause of the skier's issues and fix what you can and refer them to a specialist for treatment of the issues you can not fix.  Just like your family doctor does when you are sick with an ailment which is beyond his/her scope of expertise!  (note: unless it is a rental gear customer perhaps? ) 

post #42 of 127

You boot guys place way too much emphasis on boots, as you should.  It's your gig after all.  At the fundamental level, you are correct, ill fitting gear is very corrosive to one's ability to dial in proper technique and ski optimally. 

 

However, I'll continue to insist that being able to compensate for imperfect set ups is more of a skill and attribute than a detriment at the expert level unless you are actually competing.  The skill of being able to ski well on less than perfect gear is akin to the skill of being able to ski well in less than perfect conditions.  If we must have everything absolutely free of play and slop and perfectly dialed in air tight,  then why not only ski on packed and injected surfaces and skip powder and bump skiing?th_dunno-1[1].gif

 

Here's another thought on back seat skiing.  And it is right in line with the current discussion of fore aft alignment and gear induced misalignment.  I'm of the opinion that skiing with poles that are too long is just as likely to push an intermediate skier backseat as ill fitting boots do.

post #43 of 127

I'm not a boot guy, but I concur with others that boot setup is CRUCIAL and can easily block a skier from achieving their potential.  Yes its possible to compensate a bit in some cases, crgildart, but most of the time when a skier has to compensate for boot issues, they have to do so with gross body movements which result in limiting other desirable movements from happening as they should.

 

But I would definitely never make the claim that backseat skiing is 100% due to boot setup.  Boot setup can greatly contribute to it in some people.  For some people it might be 100% of the cause for them.  For other people, being in the backseat might be related some of the other things Bud mentioned.  There is a lot of grey area.  EVERYONE should be working with an expert boot fitter to make sure they are setup properly and eliminating bad boot setup as an issue. 

post #44 of 127

Again, what about poles?  Poles 2" too long can (and often does) knock people backseat too, but hardly ever the topic of discussionpopcorn.gif

post #45 of 127

Here's a little experiment to try (without skis on, either in boots or street shoes):

 

Find a slope > 10 degrees. Stand facing the side of the slope with one foot in front of the other. Now rotate 90 degrees to face your toes and upper body downhill. Feel where your weight is on your feet. Try it again with your feet split in a normal skiing position. How can you do this without putting yourself in the backseat?

 

This exercise helps instructors to correctly identify Bud's technique concept as a reason for backseat skiing,

post #46 of 127

Vitamin, the answer is no. Balancing on a moving ski can occur in spite of poor fitting boots. Setting your self up for success certainly would include well fitting and properly adjusted boots but your question and the 100% qualification can only lead to one answer. IMO, the fact that you posed a 100% question suggests you don't quite understand the role of boot balance and how that fits in the much larger picture we call dynamic balance. If I may suggest, over in the boot forum you will find a lot more information and advice on this subject.

 

Additionally, I am curious about your statement that your boots finally fit (even though they are insanely uncomfortable). See the contradictions? Like many here I have a very tight race fit and my boots are very comfortable. That didn't happen by chance though. It starts with selecting the right shell and ends with enough custom work to make them as absolutely comfortable as possible. Said another way, Pain and Discomfort don't facilitate good skiing, they inhibit it. Take SE's advice and do more work with your boot fitter if they are that uncomfortable. You will be glad you did and your skiing will reflect that additional comfort.

 

Same goes for flex, a 135 is pretty stiff for free skiing but pretty soft for a full race boot. Not sure what you like to do but it's quite common for a rec skier (all mountain) to fall for the "stiffer is always better" hype. The boots shouldn't be so soft it's sloppy but it also should not inhibit your ankle to the point that the you compensate by using excessive knee or hip flex. Interestingly enough that more often than not is a root cause of a consistently aft stance, in spite of having the boots / bindings/ skis properly set up.

 

So at the risk of repeating myself, the question you asked can only have one correct answer since it includes the 100% qualification. Have fun exploring the subject in the ask a boot guy forum.

Ski Well,

JASP

 


Edited by justanotherskipro - 12/7/11 at 11:42am
post #47 of 127
Thread Starter 
Jasp, for the first time i could keep both boots on for two hours with zero pain. They finally fit.

135 is the happy medium... Groomers and rec racing. I need a boot that will be beefy enough to accept the aggression i confer to the boot tongue in sick carves.
post #48 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post

Here's a little experiment to try (without skis on, either in boots or street shoes):

 

Find a slope > 10 degrees. Stand facing the side of the slope with one foot in front of the other. Now rotate 90 degrees to face your toes and upper body downhill. Feel where your weight is on your feet. Try it again with your feet split in a normal skiing position. How can you do this without putting yourself in the backseat?



You can't until you put something that glides under you and do it while traveling down the hill......or have something out in front of you to brace yourself against while standing still.  Otherwise your feet/base will always need to be further down the hill than the rest of your body inorder to stand.  Add the motion and that requirement disappears.

post #49 of 127

Vitamin, it sounds like they still could use some additional attention. Two hours isn't a very long ski day and the additional custom work that would make them more comfortable after two hours will make those first two hours even more comfortable. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't settle for street shoes that were only comfortable for two hours, don't settle for ski boots that are. 

 

 

post #50 of 127


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Jasp, for the first time i could keep both boots on for two hours with zero pain. They finally fit.
135 is the happy medium... Groomers and rec racing. I need a boot that will be beefy enough to accept the aggression i confer to the boot tongue in sick carves.


Head Raptors. Great for a low volume flat or flattish foot. Not too hard to make skinny ankles work well. Let me guess, you have a high'ish arch? Two hours is pretty unacceptable. Whether or not you like to admit it, your boots either need much more work, or they weren't the right boot to start with. Oh well. You'll sort it out. Hopefully you'll be able to confer your aggression on the hill and not online. Sounds like some snow is headed in your direction. smile.gif

post #51 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post


 



Head Raptors. Great for a low volume flat or flattish foot. Not too hard to make skinny ankles work well. Let me guess, you have a high'ish arch? 



Not really; bulky instep, VERY wide mid-fore foot... those are the two biggest issues.

 

I do have flat feet, but have a footbed that drives the instep up into the top of boot... but finally got it addressed somewhat... at least for sitting on my couch.  Now skiing, that will bring to light a whole bunch of new pain-provoking spots and the shop will be seeing more of me.

post #52 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post

Here's a little experiment to try (without skis on, either in boots or street shoes):

 

Find a slope > 10 degrees. Stand facing the side of the slope with one foot in front of the other. Now rotate 90 degrees to face your toes and upper body downhill. Feel where your weight is on your feet. Try it again with your feet split in a normal skiing position. How can you do this without putting yourself in the backseat?

 

This exercise helps instructors to correctly identify Bud's technique concept as a reason for backseat skiing,



Not getting this.  What do you mean by one foot in front of the other?  Sort of like inside tip lead?  Or heel of lead foot bumped up to toe of rear foot?

This needs a video, but in lieu of that could you describe it better?  I'm genuinely curious with my question.

post #53 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

... I need a boot that will be beefy enough to accept the aggression i confer to the boot tongue in sick carves.



Boot tongue aggression may be legal in PA, but does that make it right?

 

 

 

post #54 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post

Is back-seat skiing 99.6% a function of bad boot geometry (forward lean, ramp angle, sizing, etc)???



Now you've changed the OP content and title. hmmmm. OK.

post #55 of 127

Seems to me that if the issue isn't technique that it is likely boot setup. Either way it sounds like the OP needs to seek professional expertise. 

post #56 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post

Seems to me that if the issue isn't technique that it is likely boot setup. Either way it sounds like the OP needs to seek professional expertise. 



Bro, I don't ski in the backseat.  I started a discussion to inform myself on the topic out of interest for skiing technique.

post #57 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitamin Ski View Post



Oh really, so in ill-fit boots you can stay in the front seat?  How is that possible?


By flexing the ankles.

 

post #58 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post



Now you've changed the OP content and title. hmmmm. OK.



Answer is still NO.  Harder to learn to keep on top/front of the skis? Yes,, but totally within the realm pf possibility.  As difficult as this sounds, people actually skied just fine before the advent of booster straps.  Probably 75% + of the people on the mountain are in boots that are too big, yet only  about 65%rolleyes.gif of them ski in the backseat too much.  Shorter poles can also help a backseat skier get forward, but once you get gear that helps hold you in the correct fore/aft position you still have to learn to ski there.

post #59 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post



Not getting this.  What do you mean by one foot in front of the other?  Sort of like inside tip lead?  Or heel of lead foot bumped up to toe of rear foot?

This needs a video, but in lieu of that could you describe it better?  I'm genuinely curious with my question.


one foot in front of the other = toe touches heel (both feet under the center of the body)

 

If your feet were in a skiing stance (i.e. feet shoulder width apart with tip lead) and you rotated 90 degrees you would switch which foot had tip lead over the other. With toe to heel, when you rotate you are rotating into zero tip lead and feet shoulder width apart.

post #60 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post



You can't until you put something that glides under you and do it while traveling down the hill......or have something out in front of you to brace yourself against while standing still.  Otherwise your feet/base will always need to be further down the hill than the rest of your body inorder to stand.  Add the motion and that requirement disappears.



Can't? Hmmm - Either I can or I have better drugs. I had to go out into the rain to try this out before I wrote it up. How whacked is that?

 

 

How would you manipulate weight fore/aft if you were on flat ground? Why would one need external support just because of a pitch? 

 

Remember I'm only talking about getting out of the backseat and into "center". A big movement is not required. Can you stand on on your toes facing downhill? For me it's a little tricky (after I've been drinking), but the big movement you have to make when setting your feet back down flat is the most instructive. It's the opposite of what I'm looking for. Hmmmmm!?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
This thread is locked  
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › The relationship between sub-optimal boot geometry and BACKSEAT SKIING!