or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Men’s GS Skis to be changed from season 2017/18
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Men’s GS Skis to be changed from season 2017/18 - Page 2

post #31 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

Sorry I don't understand - for who? 
For women logically...
post #32 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post


For women logically...

But what women? WC? It's certainly not all FIS, I don't know anyone happier on 30m. When they originally came in in 2011 Anja Pearson asked FIS at an athletes meeting how it made sense for Svindal & Gut to have what was almost the same ski - now we're actually on the exact same ski in non-WC/EC

 

Does anyone know if it was considered by SRS pre Cancun?

post #33 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

But what women? WC? It's certainly not all FIS, I don't know anyone happier on 30m. When they originally came in in 2011 Anja Pearson asked FIS at an athletes meeting how it made sense for Svindal & Gut to have what was almost the same ski - now we're actually on the exact same ski in non-WC/EC

Does anyone know if it was considered by SRS pre Cancun?
We are talking about GS ski here.
post #34 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post


We are talking about GS ski here.

Yes that's right.

post #35 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

Yes that's right.
So what do Svindal and Gut have to do with it ?
post #36 of 59
Her point was that Gut (5'3) & Svindal (over 6') would both then have very similar GS skis despite their significant physical differences and the research/thinking appeared to be male-centric. And I'm asking now if if anyone knows was there a conversation about the women's reg in or before Cancun
post #37 of 59
Elin. Not sure what your frame of reference is here but, as a coach, I would say that the new skis have been much more successful for the women. For U19s that have adapted to a higher earlier line, there has not been the same issues as we have seen with u19 men on the 35m ski. Most of the results have actually been positive. Also note the Paerson statement was in 2011 before the development of the new skis! Don't underestimate the level of r&d that has taken place.

Also, people seem to get all hung up on radius when it is only one of the factors. You do realize of course that the previous generation women's GS skis although marked as >23m, were normally 27m + at wc and FIS level? I. Have had Fischer and blizzards from the previous generation in 183/182 marked >23, >25 and >27...... All with the same measured dimensions....

And with regard to different sized athletes at the same gender/level there has never been variation in specs based on size weight. There is a significant difference between Gut and vonn! That is why the "same" ski comes in different flexes, something that makes a much bigger difference than nominal marked radius!
post #38 of 59
Having to ski on them.

I'd be interested to know if there was a conversation or not, but I don't know anyone that was at Cancun. Also interested to see what happens in the next couple of years, if they follow suit for women
post #39 of 59
So, are you a U19 that is not able to make the 30m ski work? Most of the u19s, and masters, I have worked with have been quicker on them....
post #40 of 59
I've been skiing for over 50 years and purchased skis (used mind you) from ScotsSkier. His reviews of how skis perform (and equipment set ups) is one of the few reviews that actual are spot on regardless of your ability or perference in set up, show his experience along with what he witnesses in other atheletes. Additionally he gets to to try the latest top of the line (select few actually) beyond what anyone else can (luck guy, but I suspect this has more to do with his his easy and sharing demeanor).

These are one the few posters I'd say take it as gospel and the information is without bias.

Cheers

G
post #41 of 59
Sure, absolutely @oldschoolskierbut I'm not asking a hypothetical question about what 30m skis are like, I'm skiing them in FIS in my home in Europe along with all my female peers so I already know the problems with the ski. My question is whether anyone has any knowledge about the pre-Cancun conversations, we all knew about the men's skis but haven't heard much about the women's. Like what happened pre-11/12 as I've mentioned above
post #42 of 59
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

Sure, absolutely @oldschoolskierbut I'm not asking a hypothetical question about what 30m skis are like, I'm skiing them in FIS in my home in Europe along with all my female peers so I already know the problems with the ski. My question is whether anyone has any knowledge about the pre-Cancun conversations, we all knew about the men's skis but haven't heard much about the women's. Like what happened pre-11/12 as I've mentioned above

We are discussing the Lausanne's conversations here  and the racing suppliers association  only decided to offer  to the committee (and the committee accepted)  changes concerning the men  GS  ski specifications. As for the women , they will race in 2017/18 with the 12/13 skis.

post #43 of 59
Does no one else think that keeping the women's regs at the same as the men's regs (30m) is a bit harsh? Some girls are still tiny in their first few of FIS, my daughter weighed 107 lbs going into 1st year and 2 years on still only weighs 115 at 5'4. It took her and many of her friends the best part of 1st year to be able to ski anywhere near as well on the 30m as there U16 skis. I understand the 30m has worked well for most stronger, better skiers but I don't know many younger girls skiing to more than 80points that have liked it. Would it not make sense to drop the women's to say a 25m?
post #44 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by amberb View Post

Does no one else think that keeping the women's regs at the same as the men's regs (30m) is a bit harsh? Some girls are still tiny in their first few of FIS, my daughter weighed 107 lbs going into 1st year and 2 years on still only weighs 115 at 5'4. It took her and many of her friends the best part of 1st year to be able to ski anywhere near as well on the 30m as there U16 skis. I understand the 30m has worked well for most stronger, better skiers but I don't know many younger girls skiing to more than 80points that have liked it. Would it not make sense to drop the women's to say a 25m?

Yes - we (female FIS athletes) that actually have to ski them do. It would make sense to return to the old reg but like it looks like the priority is the mens skis now. Hopefully in the future

post #45 of 59
Elian and amberb . As stated previously, the critical part is the flex,much more so than the radius. And yes, at 110#,athletes need to look closely at this. I have skied all the main brands and my recommendations always take that into account. For example, I like the blizzard but it is definitely one of the stiffer ones. And, transitioning from the U16 ski to the 30m can leave them slower - if they don't adapt their technique! if they don't adapt their technique!

I see it a lot in first year U19s. They start off trying to run a straight line as they did on the smaller ski. The smart ones soon realize that the 30m ski rewards a different approach, much cleaner, higher apex and earlier transition at the gate. Those that get this quickly get faster and find that the 30 m ski is actually quicker. And for those running further back in the field it is also more stable in the crap below the gate - which of course is also less of an issue with the higher line

Remember the old adage, if all else fails - do what your coach told you in the first place!😀
post #46 of 59

@ScotsSkier you're answering a question that hasn't been asked. This is just going round in circles now, but thanks anyway

post #47 of 59

@elin I'm guessing your question is:

 

If FIS has looked at the mens division of having problem with 35's and dropped down to 30, why didn't they address or change the womens radius as well?

 

Because if so, I'd be interested to know as well.

post #48 of 59
Makes sense to drop the ladies' radius too. Maybe they should petition the FIS to do so
post #49 of 59

@Snuckerpooks yep that's right, would like to know if it's been discussed at all or was only mens addressed, from anyone involved or more informed. Be interesting to see what happens. The old skis were 27 and 23, now we're both on 30 - the exact same ski...

post #50 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

@ScotsSkier
 you're answering a question that hasn't been asked. This is just going round in circles now, but thanks anyway

Welcome to Epicski!
post #51 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post

We are discussing the Lausanne's conversations here  and the racing suppliers association  only decided to offer  to the committee (and the committee accepted)  changes concerning the men  GS  ski specifications. As for the women , they will race in 2017/18 with the 12/13 skis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elin View Post

@ScotsSkier
 you're answering a question that hasn't been asked. This is just going round in circles now, but thanks anyway

The question was already answered as above. And just for clarity, it was not discussed in cancan according to ski racing.

Perhaps you just didn't like the answer? rolleyes.gif
post #52 of 59

I'm sorry, I can't repeat myself again - I'm getting dizzy. Don't worry about it @ScotsSkier!

post #53 of 59

@ScotsSkier, I gather that part of your answer on why the woman's FIS gs isn't changing, from earlier in this thread and from other threads where you've described the great feel and turn of the woman's 188/30 FIS gs ski, is that this ski hits a "sweet spot," that at first surprised many, including (male) masters racers and coaches.  You mostly found it easier to work than the newer woman's FIS gs 183/30 version, paradoxically - or the men's versions.   And both injuries and feedback from male and female racers and coaches have backed those first impressions, at least to this point.    

 

And I believe you were saying earlier also that perhaps part of the reason they are changing the men's FIS ski this time around is that the 188/30 "sweet spot" may apply to the men also:  so a ski closer to that for the men was perhaps in order:  both women's and men's versions honing in on the happy chance of that ~188/~30 "sweet spot."  Those choosing the men's ski learning from the woman's ski, so to speak.  

 

Again, I gather from what you've posted that the men's FIS gs ski probably has no such "sweet spot." And while the earlier version probably caused knee problems, the current one has probably caused back injuries - and thus a change was in order.   

 

The hitch here is that apparently for some women in Europe that "sweet spot" is for bigger, heavier skiers, perhaps, I'd have to guess (without knowing more details of what makes the ~188/~30 a problem for them).  

 

Maybe using softer flex 188/30 skis would be the answer, again, from what you have previously posted.

 

I believe you once posted that 39/39 (medium) flex skis for at least one brand, or softer, might work well for a particular masters racer you were responding to.   I wonder if you could comment on flex grades in a way that might apply also to @elin and her gang.


Edited by ski otter - 6/28/16 at 10:13am
post #54 of 59

P.S. As a lighter weight, older skier, I think such softer flex grades might also apply to me.  

 

As far as the less stiff brands currently, I'm a bit confused there also.  I'd guess that Volkl and Rossi, perhaps, might be the softer flexing skis (and thus better for lighter weight or younger racers), but not sure.   Atomic used to be, but I heard it got stiffer some years back.  

 

I know I see all the other brands being used by younger racers also (Nordica, Head, Elan, Fischer, Blizzard).   


Edited by ski otter - 6/28/16 at 10:21am
post #55 of 59
Ski otter. There has not been a major outcry over the women's ski to the best of my knowledge. And yes, based on my experience, it does make a "sweet spot" ski when skied as it needs to be skied. Also the course sets are important! We have seen quite a lot of mixed races in recent years where the set has to comply with the youngest age group. So if you have u19s trying to make the fis ski work on a u16 set then yes, it can get difficult. Same with masters. If I set a 24m/lot of swing course in training then you have to work really hard

The men's ski by contrast has been much harder work, even at WC level. I am a bit surprised that elin has so many problems with them. Most Fis and USSA u19s women I have worked with have learned to make them work. I personally was pretty skeptical of them initially but after testing them I was a convert and have been racing successfully on them the last couple of seasons ( disclaimer - I am not a u19 girl! But i am 61 y/o and have been racing a shorter time than most U19 fis athletes !)

And yes, flex is a key consideration. Not just with these but with all race skis, still a lot of people who think that stiffer is better unfortunately. For the most part the 188/30 s are generally softer but there are some differences. Contrary to what you might expect the head and, in medium and soft flex the atomic, are at the softer end of the spectrum. Blizzard is at the stiffer end with stockli although, in my quiver, teh nordica version is a bit softer. Rossi/ dynastar and volkl are a bit softer as well. Interestingly Fischer used to be stiffer but went softer with all their GS skis this year. This of course is very much a generalization. Some brands - Fischer and atomic - make a choice of flexes available in their standard race stock. With other brands getting flex variations can depend on how well connected you are/ how low your points are.

Do not be afraid of going softer with these skis - it is important to be able to bend the ski and they still have great lateral stiffness which is what matters
post #56 of 59

@ScotsSkier , would an Atomic FIS gs 188 r. 30 (woman's regulation spec ski) with a flex rating of 45/35 be too stiff for a lighter weight male skier? (I'm only ~150 lbs, and older.)  

 

From how it was explained to me, the first number is the torsional rigidity or sideways ski flex, the second number the lengthwise flex. (In this case, is 45 stiff, or is it the other way around, lower numbers being stiffer?  Would the 35 mean medium soft flex lengthwise?)  In another thread, a 39/39 Atomic was probably a medium flex ski, I believe.   The racer who owns the ski currently says the skis could be described as a medium flex ski, to him.   He says he only races Atomics.  

 

Would this be a ski you would recommend?  Thanks.   

post #57 of 59
 
Originally Posted by elin View Post
 

@Snuckerpooks yep that's right, would like to know if it's been discussed at all or was only mens addressed, from anyone involved or more informed. Be interesting to see what happens. The old skis were 27 and 23, now we're both on 30 - the exact same ski...


Elin, what isn't mentioned is the flex of the ski's construction which can be varied with different materials and layups for the skill and preference of the skier.  A 175lb racer will likely be on much stiffer skis than the 110lb jr.

post #58 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuckerpooks View Post
 

@elin I'm guessing your question is:

 

If FIS has looked at the mens division of having problem with 35's and dropped down to 30, why didn't they address or change the womens radius as well?

 

Because if so, I'd be interested to know as well.


This one will be just my assumption, so it could as well be wrong. Thing is, before this change number of knee injures was super high, so they changed rules, because they wanted to get knee injuries down. They actually succesfuly did this, not matter what someone might say. On the other hand, number of back injures went up, most likely because of different skis, different technique of skiing required by new skis etc. Current change is to bring down number of back injures, while still trying to keep number of knee injures on level they reached over last few years.

Now why this doesn't matter for women? My assumption is, because women ski with A LOT less power then men, and back injures are nowhere near number of back injures on men side, so basically there's no need to change women regulations. On women side, they suceeded with change and all looks relatively ok (regarding injures), so why to bother changing stuff that works. On men side, they obviously think there's chance to get both goals with minor change.

On the other side, it could be something completely different, especially as request for change came from SRS (pool of ski manufacturers and other equipment/wax companies present in FIS skiing), so it could just as well have something completely monetary behind the idea.

post #59 of 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski otter View Post

@ScotsSkier
 , would an Atomic FIS gs 188 r. 30 (woman's regulation spec ski) with a flex rating of 45/35 be too stiff for a lighter weight male skier? (I'm only ~150 lbs, and older.)  

From how it was explained to me, the first number is the torsional rigidity or sideways ski flex, the second number the lengthwise flex. (In this case, is 45 stiff, or is it the other way around, lower numbers being stiffer?  Would the 35 mean medium soft flex lengthwise?)  In another thread, a 39/39 Atomic was probably a medium flex ski, I believe.   The racer who owns the ski currently says the skis could be described as a medium flex ski, to him.   He says he only races Atomics.  

Would this be a ski you would recommend?  Thanks.   

Iirc the 45/35 is the medium flex, the soft was 46/36 from the 12/13 and 13/14 skis. Later years have lower numbers. Not at home at the moment but will check when I get back And yes,lower numbers are stiffer. At 150# you should be fine with it. the numbers are the tip and tail flex as I recall, they do not indicate the torsional flex

Edit. yes, 45/35 is the medium flex. It is also the media flex on the 14/15 ski with the new plate. I have a good pair of the 14/15s available in a 183
Edited by ScotsSkier - 7/7/16 at 6:04pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Men’s GS Skis to be changed from season 2017/18