EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Standardizing our heights and weights when discussing gear
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Standardizing our heights and weights when discussing gear - Page 2

post #31 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by segbrown View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post


Well I have gone on way too long 

Oh, never!


+1

 

Tog, that was hilarious.

post #32 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlowObstacle View Post

Wow.    According to those numbers I'm < 75th pctile in weight (!), somewhat above 75th pctile in height, so "light" for my height.  Weird, considering that according to BMI I'm right at the border of being obese.   Are Americans really that heavy?

 

OTOH, BMI is pretty borked:  according to that metric, Michael Jordan had weight problems when he was in the NBA.  Not that I'm Michael Jordan, but BMI said I was overweight/obese at a point in my life when that was flat-out ridiculous.  These days, there might be more of an argument to be made...

BMI is borked. It's a good surrogate for % body fat in a typical group. But for individuals, it can be way off if you're athletic or lean, cuz muscle weighs more than fat. So Lindsey V prolly has a seriously high BMI that's meaningless. Conversely you can be a fat thin person, meaning sedentary office type, careful with food, so not overweight, normal BMI, but what's there is mostly fat.

 

And yep, Americans are really that heavy. These days. My weight, 165, would have been nearly median in 1960. A woman's median weight in 1960 was in the middle 130's. I'd like to say we're also taller, but nope, just wider. 

 

Supersize us! eek.gif

post #33 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by tball View Post

I like this standard better:  Height in Feet, Inches, Weight in lbs

Myself for example: 5'11" 180lbs

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rossi Smash View Post

I suppose just using your height and weight is too simple? th_dunno-1%5B1%5D.gif
Where's the opportunity in that??

With a good enough chart we could just get it down to one number. It would be the exact percentile, say 71.4. Would give instant comparison to others. Of course it would be two numbers like 71.4 / 68.6 for height/weight.
Now one can divide and get all sorts of data comparison! And a third number we could really use to buy skis.

You think it's crazy? Remember Soloman's "Power Number"? No longer were we to buy skis in centimeters, we were to buy them with just one number. That was determined by some chart I guess that correlated height , weight, ability, and aggressiveness.

This lead to being in the store with the newly trained salesperson who was on the brink of a new era where we truly had everything figured out. No more unknowns and doubts!

"So, what size does that come in?"
-"For you, you're probably a Power 8"
"Huh...uhhh...Ok, how long is that?"
-"It's an 8"
"You mean a 'Power 8' right??"
-"Yes. That's right. It's a whole new system !"
"So why am I an 8? Why not a 7?"
-"Well its based on...blah blah blah..then I look at the chart and I get 8"
"Huh. That's some chart. Well what would I say to someone who asks on the lift what size ski I'm on?"
-"8"
"And in centimeters? They might not know what an '8' is"
-"Well this is the new way. Soon enough everybody will know. It'll make it much easier to buy skis. Give it time"
"Ok, let's say I decide I'm a 7. How much shorter is the 7 than the 8?"
-"Well its one down but you're an 8 so why would you do that?"
"I don't know, maybe I want a shorter ski for moguls?"
-"Nah come on. You wouldn't do that."
"Maybe I get hurt then and want something easier?"
-"I suppose since you really can't handle what you're supposed to be on you'd go to a 7."
"Great. Now how much shorter is it than the 8?"
-"There are no half numbers like shoe sizes. These are Power Numbers. It would be one down."
"Does Rossi use Power Numbers now?"
-"No. Soloman invented it. They're really forward thinking. They invented this Cap construction too. That's going to be big."
"So if I take a 200cm Rossi and hold it next to the Soloman Power 7 we could get an idea how long it is. "
-"Everyone wants to do that. Really it would be better to just get used to the new system. "
"Who else is using it?"
-"Just Soloman. It's the future."
"So to compare this Power 7 in a Rossi I'll just hold it next to it ok? Hmmm... Looks like the 200 is bigger than the 7 and shorter than the 8! A seven and a half"
-"No such thing. It's 7 or 8."
"Well if I wanted to go between I'd just get another brand in 200?"
-"Yeah but you're an 8. Get that everything has been figured out. You'll be happier on what you're supposed to be on. A Power 8."
"You mean a 205?"
-"No. You're in the wrong system again. Centimeters. We did that for years. This is all new. Again, this is the way everyone is going. It's all been figured out to make everything easier. No more guessing"
"So if I want to go outside the recommendations?
-"Not a good idea, but I guess you should lie and tell me things so I'll put you down as a 7."
"Or just buy another brand How about you tell me about these Rossi's here?"
-"Ok. Blah...blah...blah. You look like you should be on the 205"
"You mean the Power 8??"
-"That's Soloman and it's completely different. But yes you should get the Soloman."
"Soloman in a 205cm. Now it makes sense"
-"No. You're comparing Apples to Oranges."
"Well then it's either the Rossi in a 205cm or the Soloman in a Power 8. How about Volkl?"
-"205. The Soloman would be better though in a Power8"
"So it's a little shorter. Like a 203cm"
-"Nope. Totally..."
"Different. Right. I better think about this...thanks."

Then there was Swatch Time. I guess it's still around. Late 90's, I think. Internet the future and all that. SwatchWas going to reinvent how we tell time. No hours, minutes, time zones etc. Just a number that gives you the time and it's the same around the world! That way you can compare easily two people doing things at different places on the earth. Not a bad idea.
Quote:
Instead of hours and minutes, the mean solar day is divided up into 1000 parts called ".beats". Each .beat lasts 1 minute and 26.4 seconds. Times are notated as a 3-digit number out of 1000 after midnight. So, @248 would indicate a time 248 .beats after midnight representing 248/1000 of a day, just over 5 hours and 57 minutes.

There are no time zones in Internet Time; instead, the new time scale of Biel Mean Time (BMT) is used, based on Swatch's headquarters in Biel, Switzerland and equivalent to Central European Time, West Africa Time, and UTC+1. Unlike civil time in most European countries, Internet Time does not observe daylight saving time.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swatch_Internet_Time

So then they went and based it off Biel, Switzerland ?? Is that where Jessica is from?Not Greenwich, England where all time is based off since any international agreement ever took place Yep, they took the Soloman route in a more precise Swiss way.

So, when's the last time you used Swatch Time or a Power number to buy skis? Probably never.
Edited by Tog - 6/5/13 at 11:44am
post #34 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post




You think it's crazy? Remember Soloman's "Power Number"? No longer were we to buy skis in centimeters, we were to buy them with just one number. That was determined by some chart I guess that correlated height , weight, ability, and aggressiveness.

This lead to being in the store with the newly trained salesperson who was on the brink of a new era where we truly had everything figured out. No more unknowns and doubts!

"So, what size does that come in?"
-"For you, you're probably a Power 8"
"Huh...uhhh...Ok, how long is that?"
-"It's an 8"
"You mean a 'Power 8' right??"
-"Yes. That's right. It's a whole new system !"
"So why am I an 8? Why not a 7?"
-"Well its based on...blah blah blah..then I look at the chart and I get 8"
"Huh. That's some chart. Well what would I say to someone who asks on the lift what size ski I'm on?"
-"8"
"And in centimeters? They might not know what an '8' is"
-"Well this is the new way. Soon enough everybody will know. It'll make it much easier to buy skis. Give it time"
"Ok, let's say I decide I'm a 7. How much shorter is the 7 than the 8?"
-"Well its one down but you're an 8 so why would you do that?"
"I don't know, maybe I want a shorter ski for moguls?"
-"Nah come on. You wouldn't do that."
"Maybe I get hurt then and want something easier?"
-"I suppose since you really can't handle what you're supposed to be on you'd go to a 7."
"Great. Now how much shorter is it than the 8?"
-"There are no half numbers like shoe sizes. These are Power Numbers. It would be one down."
"Does Rossi use Power Numbers now?"
-"No. Soloman invented it. They're really forward thinking. They invented this Cap construction too. That's going to be big."
"So if I take a 200cm Rossi and hold it next to the Soloman Power 7 we could get an idea how long it is. "
-"Everyone wants to do that. Really it would be better to just get used to the new system. "
"Who else is using it?"
-"Just Soloman. It's the future."
"So to compare this Power 7 in a Rossi I'll just hold it next to it ok? Hmmm... Looks like the 200 is bigger than the 7 and shorter than the 8! A seven and a half"
-"No such thing. It's 7 or 8."
"Well if I wanted to go between I'd just get another brand in 200?"
-"Yeah but you're an 8. Get that everything has been figured out. You'll be happier on what you're supposed to be on. A Power 8."
"You mean a 205?"
-"No. You're in the wrong system again. Centimeters. We did that for years. This is all new. Again, this is the way everyone is going. It's all been figured out to make everything easier. No more guessing"
"So if I want to go outside the recommendations?
-"Not a good idea, but I guess you should lie and tell me things so I'll put you down as a 7."
"Or just buy another brand How about you tell me about these Rossi's here?"
-"Ok. Blah...blah...blah. You look like you should be on the 205"
"You mean the Power 8??"
-"That's Soloman and it's completely different. But yes you should get the Soloman."
"Soloman in a 205cm. Now it makes sense"
-"No. You're comparing Apples to Oranges."
"Well then it's either the Rossi in a 205cm or the Soloman in a Power 8. How about Volkl?"
-"205. The Soloman would be better though in a Power8"
"So it's a little shorter. Like a 203cm"
-"Nope. Totally..."
"Different. Right. I better think about this...thanks."

 

roflmao.gifROFLMAO...In the sense that I have that exact conversation more times than I could count in 1991-93roflmao.gif

post #35 of 49

1000

NEW and IMPROVED DIN chart converted to a ski sizing chart.

post #36 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

1000

NEW and IMPROVED DIN chart converted to a ski sizing chart.


That is only for type I or II skiers.  Add 20 cms for type III+ level 11s like me

post #37 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post


That is only for type I or II skiers.  Add 20 cms for type III+ level 11s like me

Adjust a line for you being "Over 50" ;)

post #38 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

Adjust a line for you being "Over 50" ;)

Tick.....Tick....Tick.....Tick

post #39 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

1000

NEW and IMPROVED DIN chart converted to a ski sizing chart.

Great!  If i back solve I am now > 6'4" .biggrin.gif   Not so happy about being >210 though......

post #40 of 49
Damn it Ray, that single malt treats you well to say the least. smile.gifsmile.gifsmile.gif
post #41 of 49

This ranks near the top of the strangest recent threads. Just give your height, weight and ability and most of us can take it from there. Those that can't will not benefit from the suggested eye chart.  It's only when there is no info that it's hard to interpolate a reviewers comments to our own particular situation.

post #42 of 49
Yes strange but think of the YouTube videos to come out with the new classification system.

"My weight loss story- How I went from a Light Middle Heavy Weight to a Heavy Middle Lightweight! In 9 Weeks!"
post #43 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

This whole thing is beyond me.
Hey our units make sense. Your foot is...roughly a foot if they're large. Or have shoes on.
Index finger -1st knuckle to second is an inch.

But really we should go all Nordica like.
I mean for a boot that's made in Italy, company is also in Austria, they choose for their sizing not Mondo or US shoe size but English shoe size.
What, just to be different than Lange?
I mean I loved Eddie the Eagle but really.

So in honor of Nordica's forward thinking I recommend we go to English weight. That means "Stone" ( the 'd' is invisible and silent).
Now as shocking as it seems, they, those people on that island, really do use Stone for weight. How do I know? People tell me all the time- on YouTube.
Yes, such riveting classics as "Weight Watchers Crisps-How I Lost 5 Stone" , "Vicky Lost 4 Stones", or " My Amazing 7 1/2 Stone Weight Loss Transformation Story....Must Read" (yes it is a video). The first and last just confirming that Vicky used poor grammar and that Stone is Stone, not as in "busting stones".

With that cleared up how much is a Stone?
Well first I'm obligated to say that due to the Weights and Measures Act of 1985, stone, abbrv 'st' is not legal measure for trade. Apparently YouTube didnt see the memo and has no qualms about it. It is the Internet, and by Goreian logic it's correct.

This from an online discussion in 2004:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-263291.html

I should interject at this juncture that we've been duped by the Brits. Really. They've been playing all "pounds" or "kilos", but I can't think of any film, detective series , random drama, comedy, where they mentioned this "stone" business. For that I have to find out on YouTube?? With Vicky's questionable grammar? Truly appalling.

I guess we'll get back at them using terms like "light middle heavyweight" or whatever beyond would have us use. (note "the Pale" is invisible and silent with beyond)

Just makes me wonder what else the Brits have been lying to us about all these years. What the food is really good? They've got gobs of oil not on the garage floor? Mad Cow disease doesn't have to do with cows?

Back to the stone. It is in fact not capitalized. (all cititizens of the UK feel free to (finally) come clean and correct me about all this btw)

Ok, so the value of a stone, the amount, has been agreed upon,( before they reneged in 1985), as 14lbs or 6.35 kg for you fancy types. (don't ask me to convert to beyond's system.)

Note that stone seems simple now, but stone was different for weighing different materials and different towns used their own standard rock so "a stone" varied from 4 to 32 lbs. (that's where the lying started)

So if we use the 25th percentile (questionable term. How is it different than the 75th other than a different direction) of 166 pounds that would be:
166 pounds = 11 stone 12 pound
166= 154 + 12
I think "they" say it "eleven stone twelve" , but since we were never trained (lied to) even by such films as Bridget Jones where she's always going on about weight- nary a mention of the stone.

Well I have gone on way too long and haven't even mentioned the height system. We should of course use "hand" as horses are still (?) measured that way. It goes so well with stone and the plural is the singular.
A hand is 4 inches. Thus our 25th% dude:
68inches= 17 hand

Our 25th% guy is thus: 11 stone 12 pound and 17 hand.
What's that in beyond?

 

The current British system is worse than you think. It's half imperial and half metric across the board.

For example, most people do refer to their weight in stones and pounds (14 pounds to a stone as you mentioned), but food is sold in kilos. So, I weigh about 12 stone, but I bought a half kilo of beef at the supermarket the other day.

It doesn't stop there. Road signs are in miles and fuel efficiency is stated in miles per gallon (though a British gallon is slightly bigger than a US gallon for reasons too insane to get into here), but fuel itself is sold in liters. You buy 20 liters so that you can make it to your destination 100 miles away.

Volume is no different. You drink a pint of beer but a half-liter of Coke.

Temperatures depend on who you talk to. The BBC reports everything in centigrade, and quite a lot of people have made the conversion. But some people haven't made the mental conversion, and some local stations still report things in Fahrenheit. So, the BBC says it's going to be 20 C today, but the local channel says it will be 68 F.

It's got to be about the most inefficient way of doing things. It's worse for me because I talk to a number of people in the US, a number of people from Europe and Asia, and of course the natives. So, I'm constantly converting things to accommodate for people who understand imperial, metric, or half and half. Luckily for me, I learned both systems before moving here. If I hadn't, it would have confused the hell out of me.
post #44 of 49

We've got the British-style mishmash in Canada, too. Grocery stores advertise in pounds, because it sounds cheaper, but actually sell in kilos. People come in feet and inches, skis in centimetres, gas in litres (sounds cheaper than in gallons). This Brit stone thing is just weird, though.

Anyway, if you want to see what a completely average guy looks like, take a look at me: 50th percentile in height, 50th in weight. So I should probably lose 10 or 15 pounds, since the average person is kinda pudgy, n'est-ce pas? (Oh, yeah. We do everything in two languages, too.)
 

post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post

Adjust a line for you being "Over 50" ;)


Not just yet.  I've got over a year on the other line.  How about you? tongue.gif

post #46 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by crgildart View Post


Not just yet.  I've got over a year on the other line.  How about you? tongue.gif

Closer than you. nonono2.gif

post #47 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveturner View Post

This ranks near the top of the strangest recent threads. Just give your height, weight and ability and most of us can take it from there. Those that can't will not benefit from the suggested eye chart.  It's only when there is no info that it's hard to interpolate a reviewers comments to our own particular situation.

Strange yes. Entertaining, definitely; I've learned more about the British system here than all my trips there. But FWIW, my point in posting this wasn't about whether we could figure out ski length recs given height and weight, it was about Americans' self-perception, and how that might affect our sizing up to European skis. You know the joke how everything sees themselves as middle class, no matter what their income? Well, I think that a lot of folks see themselves as  "average sized," when unless they've kept up with the CDC, they're probably using an "average" from back when we drank 12 oz Cokes. These days you could be an "average" sized skier and still weigh over 190 lbs. So tell me, at Phil's size, which is near average, do you actually choose the average (middle ski) from 5 offered lengths? Or do you choose one near the top, based on the idea that the new average is the old heavy? Or that the American average is the Austrian heavy? Do you recommend a stiff ski for "bigger" guys that can flex decently at the average American weight, or do you go for an average flex that a 190 lb skier can bend into a noodle? See, our problem is that the people who actually design and make the skis aren't our size...and we're not even sure what our size means relative to each other, let alone Europeans. That's how percentiles help. I can provide graphs, if you really want eye charts. wink.gif

post #48 of 49

Soda sizes!

So the different sizes of soda in US versus Japan is equivalent maybe to the different weights US/Europe?

 

Too Big to Chug: How Our Sodas Got So Huge

By Azeen Ghorayshi  Mon Jun. 25, 2012

http://www.motherjones.com/media/2012/06/supersize-biggest-sodas-mcdonalds-big-gulp-chart

2011: KFC introduces a drink so big that it has a bucket handle to carry it. In what can only be a cruel joke on humankind, for every Mega Jug purchased, KFC promises it will donate $1 to the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.
 

post #49 of 49

Stop marking ounces and just label everything in slugs.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Standardizing our heights and weights when discussing gear