or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flexing at the ankle - 101 - Page 4

post #91 of 103
I'm surprised your fitter doesn't have intuitions... They're hard not to find. They've got their pros and cons. A power wrap might be one of your few options.
post #92 of 103

Some people here have had a very good experience talking to Intuition on the phone.

Could be your best bet with the power wrap.

Another choice is Zipfit. I don't know about the width with those. You could call them too.

What about asking this in the ask a boot fitter thread?

post #93 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
 


I think you're talking about forward lean angles which have been decreasing. If you decrease that, meaning the cuff/shin is more upright then you need to correspondingly decrease the ramp angle or you open the ankle joint more.

 

It seems to me that the same thing is accomplished by gas pedaling, (lifter under the toe on sole of boot), or lifiing the binding toe, but maybe there's a difference. It's better to build it to suit without having to gas pedal, but effects are similar.

Is that correct Bud?

 

btw, dakine I don't think anyone knew that was the point of your OP

where were these ravings of Mikeala printed/broadcasted?

I believe you are on target here Tog.  The general protocol is to address dorsiflexion needs first, which means establishing the internal boot angles first.  Once the ankle is set we then go outside the boot and assess delta angle created by the bindings toe and heel height differentials which affect the lower leg angle.  It would be counter productive at this point, once we established a good net forward lean angle for the ankle RoM, to go back and change the boot cuff forward lean to affect lower leg angle.  This should be addressed with changing the delta angle.

 

Finding our optimum lower leg angle is critical to fore/aft balance and the ability to effectively pressure the ski shovels early in the turns.  Too much angle and the skier loses this ability and must resort to moving the hips aft to counter balance and the ability to extend is inhibited, too little angle and again the ability to effectively pressure the shovels is diminished and a breaking at the waist becomes the compensatory action.

 

As to is it better to build to suit without having to gas pedal?  I could see problems with hyper mobility where we want to close the ankle joint inside the boot by dropping the ramp angle a small amount and increasing the cuff angle.  This situation will many times require a gas pedal to bring the lower leg angle back to a more upright position.  It is sometimes not possible to to drop the ramp angle significantly enough to reduce the need to add forward lean.  Consequently, a gas pedal is warranted, especially if the boot sole is on the shorter side.  Remember the closer together the toe piece  and heel piece are together the greater the delta angle.  So small footed skiers with hyper mobility most likely will need gas pedaling.

 

In recent years binding companies have reduced stand height differentials to get closer together in the range of 0-4mm vs. a few years back when some companies ie; Look/Rossi had binding stand height differentials as much as 8mm.  Combine this 8mm difference with a short boot sole length and the skier is doomed to a very flexed stance with the hips aft and unable to extend fully.

post #94 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6 View Post
 

I cant see how one could flex a boot of 130 or stiffer by just closing the ancle. Lifting the toes. In cold weather. The only way you can flex your boot is by positioning our com forward. Pulling your feet back. Or opening your knee joint. Bending at the waist. Annother interesting thing is that weighting the ball of your foot is actually opening your ancle joint decreasing shin pressure. Closing it puts your weight on the shins and there through pressures the tips of your skis through the front part of your boots. Still we are told to pressure the ball of our foot. Why? What am I missing?

G forces help flex the boot.

 

I agree with your observations.  I find myself in Tog's group #1 where pulling the feet back, or pulling toes up help maintain shin pressure.  I also feel that a the top of my turns where my CoM is diverging from my feet, I want to pressure my first met head on the outside ski but as I pass through the fall line I am balancing more pressure on my heel keeping pressure on my shins, dorsiflexing my ankle to allow my skis to accelerate as my feet and CoM converge through edge change and remain in balance to be in a good position at the top of the new turn to once again pressure the first met head of my outside ski as the paths diverge.  Hope that makes sense?

post #95 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post
 

Mikela was interviewed after the race on network TV.

So were several other skiers.

The word setup came up many times making me think they have been experimenting a lot.

I have tried the raised toe setup and it is going the wrong way for me.

I like a fair amount of zeppa and about 4mm of delta to help me sty forward.

I'm short and dense which means my COM is quite low.

I'm thinking the shorter and more dense you are the more ramp you can use to keep your COM in a good place.

Hi dakine,  In general a shorter boot sole length combined with increased zeppa angle and higher end of the spectrum delta is a recipe for a very flexed stance which severely inhibits the skier's ability to extend fully and to effectively pressure the ski's forebody.   Have you assessed your dorsi flexion range of motion?  is it limited, normal, hyper mobile? what is your boot sole length?  what bindings are you using?  The answer to these questions will help give me a better visual of your needs.

 

Remember, if you have been used to skiing with a set up as you have described, your first runs with a more upright stance may feel awkward at first.  Optimally you should be able to stand fairly tall with good shin pressure at the top of your turns without feeling like you will fall over forward.

post #96 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post
 

this is so vivid in my mind, i assumed you guys have watched this - pay attention to his ankles. he can't really get forward here - he has no support from his boots or skis... but he is a world cup athlete, so he can make up for the missing support a bit

 

 

I say than when FIS gets to 250cm skis with R59, they should mandate ballet shoes!

I would bet that Didier's shins (anterior tibialus muscles) were working very hard to maintain fore/aft balance without the support of a stiff plastic boot.


Edited by bud heishman - 12/8/13 at 7:03pm
post #97 of 103
Yes but not closing the ankle, they were controlling how much it opened! wink.gif
post #98 of 103

Bud,,,

I have to ski in a very flexed stance.

Because of injury to my left knee it has no stability when not flexed.

This is an adaptive setup.

 

Don't look at this Xray if you have a queasy stomach.

No ACL, little cartilege and a bunch of bone chips spit out behind the joint.

I have been working with a great ortho guy who knows me well.

Based on replacement joint life considerations it is likely that I would wear out a metal knee if I do it now.

If I can make it through two more seasons as I am, he thinks that wear life would be OK.

So, I'm trying to hold off until I hit 70.

My ortho guy thinks the joint works like a gear because the joint surface is so rough things don't slip around when the joint is flexed and loaded.

 

That's my style....flexed and loaded.

1000

The snow had a breakable crust from salting in the pic so I was pussyfooting on the course.

 

 

I'm not looking for sympathy here, just showing what can be done with good boot adjustment.

That knee was good enough to get me to #1 in the state and #12 in the nation in the NASTAR 65-70 Platinum class.

My other knee is fine and I have a pretty good 1 1/2 ski technique.

 

Thanks, everybody for the useful comments.

Don't count Lindsey out because she has a partially torn ACL.

As long as your knee is bent and loaded an ACL is unnecessary.

A hot tub, some Pappy Van Winkle and a bit of Vicodin....I'm going to keep turning as long as I can!

post #99 of 103

...and, having skipped a part of conversation..just a $.01, these racing pics are of terrific skiers playing with the course conditions...which changes...and in addition many pics are grabbing unknown positions of pitch in the course...steep or super_steep;-).  Tough to nail down images of technique basics 101-104...

fwiw.....

post #100 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman View Post
 

Hi dakine,  In general a shorter boot sole length combined with increased zeppa angle and higher end of the spectrum delta is a recipe for a very flexed stance which severely inhibits the skier's ability to extend fully and to effectively pressure the ski's forebody.   Have you assessed your dorsi flexion range of motion?  is it limited, normal, hyper mobile? what is your boot sole length?  what bindings are you using?  The answer to these questions will help give me a better visual of your needs.

 

Remember, if you have been used to skiing with a set up as you have described, your first runs with a more upright stance may feel awkward at first.  Optimally you should be able to stand fairly tall with good shin pressure at the top of your turns without feeling like you will fall over forward.


I'll play if you don't mind.  I notice a difference between the two setups:  I felt too much tip pressure on the Rossi setup.  I skied great a few days ago tipping from the middle on my Nordica setup and the pressure was built through G's, not tip pressure. It was the first time in a while I felt pressure on my heel towards the end of the turn.  The pressure flowed from my foot center to the heel as tipping, pressure and rotary increased.  The next day both tuberosities of the 5th met were sore.  I had them punched a little, but at the time it was a great sensor for my skiing, but they were tender (should I have not punched my boots here?  Am I loosing feel?  OR are these 5th met tubes not something to mess with? ) 

 

My focus right now is tension (not breaking at the waist / strong inside) and functionality (allowing that inside to relax to allow COM to flow)

6 feet tall

Large DF range (not sure about hyper DF)

2008 Dobermann 26.0 / 305mm (not sure the zeta)

Rossi Axial 12 on a Rossi E88

Look Pivot 14 on a  Nordica Hell and Back


Edited by Crud Buster - 12/8/13 at 6:12pm
post #101 of 103

I've been following this thread - and a couple of closely related ones that are running in parallel, such as the "forward lean" thread - with a lot of interest. It has gotten the wheels really turning re: how the ideas might apply to me, personally. Some of the questions I have might more properly be the subject for Ask the Boot Guys, but since we've got so many informed commentators on-topic here, I'm going slap them down anyway.

 

Historically I've believed that my turns are much better with what most would consider a soft boot flex and fairly aggressive forward lean in the cuff. When I use a boot like this I can work the different sections of the ski better at will, maintain balance better, get higher edge angles, tip and pull back the inside foot better, etc., etc. By contrast, with a straighter, stiffer boot (or sometimes even in a given boot with the top buckle tightened more), I have trouble pressuring the shovel and generally have to fight too hard to stay out of the back seat. Put a different way, when I can get my knees out over my toes, I feel like I get a kind of "suspension" effect from the flex of the boot, which helps me manage pressure better. In a more upright stance / stiffer boot, I feel like attempts to keep my hips forward and/or pressure the front of the ski tend to result in more of a "chair" posture with my COM over my heels instead of over the balls of my feet.

 

I suspect that if you guys saw me ski - I don't have useful video at the moment - you would say that I was "overflexed" at times. Over the years a couple people have mentioned to me in passing that they thought this might be the case. You can see, therefore, why this thread has been a bit of a revelation to me. In particular, I think I sometimes resemble @bud heishman's remark about having difficulty achieving full extension. I also wonder if I could get better mileage out of my quads with a more upright stance, if I could get to a point where I felt properly in control of the forebody of the ski in such a position.

 

 

 

With all this in mind, three questions:

 

1) Without straining at all, my dorsiflexion measurements, using the test described here, are: 5.75" / 14.6cm (L), 6.25" / 15.9cm (R)  Apparently this is not considered "limited" dorsiflexion (< 10cm), but is it considered high ROM or just average?

 

2) I don't understand why having a large ROM for dorsiflexion affects one's alpine skiing. I can see how having severely limited ROM could be a problem, but since the ski boot limits my ROM to a smaller range than I would have out of the boot, I don't understand why having more movement capacity in my ankle is relevant. Can someone explain that?

 

3) Is there some kind of immediate test I can do myself to see if a different kind of setup (e.g., different ramp angle) would work better for me? (I understand that what I really need is that chimera, the on-hill boot-fitter / technique analyst, but I don't have that, and won't in the near future.)

 

Me:

  • 5' 7" 135lbs. Very short legs, proportionally (27" inseam)
  • Currently skiing a Fischer Vacuum 100 Jr. Race, size 24, 288mm sole
  • Hard snow binding setup is a rebranded Marker on the Blizzard IQ system - Griffon style heel with the older pre-Royals toe.
  • Level 8 skier, beer leaguer, east coaster

 

Unfortunately I have no hard snow video, and only a tiny bit of low-res and/or far-distant soft-snow video, taken mostly from behind. (My friends are interested in skiing, not photography.) However, perhaps the appended screen caps will help somehow, woeful though they are. There is also this pic from years ago, which is less fuzzy but may show the ankle flex I'm talking about.

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

post #102 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post
 

I've been following this thread - and a couple of closely related ones that are running in parallel, such as the "forward lean" thread - with a lot of interest. It has gotten the wheels really turning re: how the ideas might apply to me, personally. Some of the questions I have might more properly be the subject for Ask the Boot Guys, but since we've got so many informed commentators on-topic here, I'm going slap them down anyway.

 

Historically I've believed that my turns are much better with what most would consider a soft boot flex and fairly aggressive forward lean in the cuff. When I use a boot like this I can work the different sections of the ski better at will, maintain balance better, get higher edge angles, tip and pull back the inside foot better, etc., etc. By contrast, with a straighter, stiffer boot (or sometimes even in a given boot with the top buckle tightened more), I have trouble pressuring the shovel and generally have to fight too hard to stay out of the back seat. Put a different way, when I can get my knees out over my toes, I feel like I get a kind of "suspension" effect from the flex of the boot, which helps me manage pressure better. In a more upright stance / stiffer boot, I feel like attempts to keep my hips forward and/or pressure the front of the ski tend to result in more of a "chair" posture with my COM over my heels instead of over the balls of my feet.

 

I suspect that if you guys saw me ski - I don't have useful video at the moment - you would say that I was "overflexed" at times. Over the years a couple people have mentioned to me in passing that they thought this might be the case. You can see, therefore, why this thread has been a bit of a revelation to me. In particular, I think I sometimes resemble @bud heishman's remark about having difficulty achieving full extension. I also wonder if I could get better mileage out of my quads with a more upright stance, if I could get to a point where I felt properly in control of the forebody of the ski in such a position.

 

 

 

With all this in mind, three questions:

 

1) Without straining at all, my dorsiflexion measurements, using the test described here, are: 5.75" / 14.6cm (L), 6.25" / 15.9cm (R)  Apparently this is not considered "limited" dorsiflexion (< 10cm), but is it considered high ROM or just average?

 

2) I don't understand why having a large ROM for dorsiflexion affects one's alpine skiing. I can see how having severely limited ROM could be a problem, but since the ski boot limits my ROM to a smaller range than I would have out of the boot, I don't understand why having more movement capacity in my ankle is relevant. Can someone explain that?

 

3) Is there some kind of immediate test I can do myself to see if a different kind of setup (e.g., different ramp angle) would work better for me? (I understand that what I really need is that chimera, the on-hill boot-fitter / technique analyst, but I don't have that, and won't in the near future.)

 

Me:

  • 5' 7" 135lbs. Very short legs, proportionally (27" inseam)
  • Currently skiing a Fischer Vacuum 100 Jr. Race, size 24, 288mm sole
  • Hard snow binding setup is a rebranded Marker on the Blizzard IQ system - Griffon style heel with the older pre-Royals toe.
  • Level 8 skier, beer leaguer, east coaster

 

Unfortunately I have no hard snow video, and only a tiny bit of low-res and/or far-distant soft-snow video, taken mostly from behind. (My friends are interested in skiing, not photography.) However, perhaps the appended screen caps will help somehow, woeful though they are. There is also this pic from years ago, which is less fuzzy but may show the ankle flex I'm talking about.

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01

 

LEAD Technologies Inc. V1.01


Ideally our lower leg angle and back angle should match, I believe. 

post #103 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post
 

Bud,,,

I have to ski in a very flexed stance.

Because of injury to my left knee it has no stability when not flexed.

This is an adaptive setup.

 

Don't look at this Xray if you have a queasy stomach.

No ACL, little cartilege and a bunch of bone chips spit out behind the joint.

I have been working with a great ortho guy who knows me well.

Based on replacement joint life considerations it is likely that I would wear out a metal knee if I do it now.

If I can make it through two more seasons as I am, he thinks that wear life would be OK.

So, I'm trying to hold off until I hit 70.

My ortho guy thinks the joint works like a gear because the joint surface is so rough things don't slip around when the joint is flexed and loaded.

 

That's my style....flexed and loaded.

1000

The snow had a breakable crust from salting in the pic so I was pussyfooting on the course.

 

 

I'm not looking for sympathy here, just showing what can be done with good boot adjustment.

That knee was good enough to get me to #1 in the state and #12 in the nation in the NASTAR 65-70 Platinum class.

My other knee is fine and I have a pretty good 1 1/2 ski technique.

 

Thanks, everybody for the useful comments.

Don't count Lindsey out because she has a partially torn ACL.

As long as your knee is bent and loaded an ACL is unnecessary.

A hot tub, some Pappy Van Winkle and a bit of Vicodin....I'm going to keep turning as long as I can!

Well now that changes things a bit doesn't it!  Good for you finding a workable solution and kicking some butt!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching