or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Why carving is not considered skiing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why carving is not considered skiing - Page 2

post #31 of 36

Y'er right

Originally Posted by doublediamond223
The first three skiers shown look like they are making world cup turns, WOW.
Gianluca Grigoletto and Alessandra Merlin were WC racers.
I think that all the others reached at least Europa Cup racing before switching to Carving
post #32 of 36

Different techniques ?

Like Jack M, I alpine snowboard. I started to ski this season, just as an extra challenge. I found extreme carving on skis to be nearly as much fun as on the alpine board and certainly easier when the snow gets soft or too chopped up. I’ve read several times now, that riser plates are needed for leverage more than boot out, which doesn’t make sense to me. On alpine snowboards we have very little riser and yet have no problem with inclination despite up 200mm width. I bought Atomic M9s with a 74mm waist, and they roll over to “boot out” easily. Now I never took any ski lessons, and just applied the co-ordination from inline skating with the angulation from heel side turns on an alpine snowboard and was carving hard almost immediately. Is it possible that conventional ski technique hinders the development of the angulation and transition commitment needed to carve well on carving skis. This would explain the need for two types of instruction in Europe as mentioned above.

Also does anyone know if there is a riser made for Metron skis?

post #33 of 36
Originally Posted by jjdow
So, why has this style of skiing fallen out of vogue? It's heyday was 1996 - 1999? I was in Innsbruck in 1996 and shops at the Stubai glacier were demoing these types of skis. Volkl had a video featuring some Italian guy who was supposed to be a world champion in some kind of extreme carving series.
Originally Posted by jjdow

I would think these skis would be popular on the hardpack of Northeast US, but maybe shorty modern slalom skis are too close in design to make these skis popular. I think Volkl stopped making the FunCarver line a few years ago.

In 2000, regular SL racers started using shaped skis, roughly the same date "funcarving" fell out of vogue - no co-incidence. Once you could start using the sidecut more in "regular" racing, there was little raison d'être to have this special discipline. Little, but not none; it would be nice to see what some of the world's best skiers could achieve through an extremely offset course, when freed from the limits of the FIS radius length, radius and height restrictions. But with any officially-sanctioned event you're always going to encounter the saftey worries associated with massive lifters and ultra-curvy sidecuts.
post #34 of 36
Originally Posted by MOV39
I've noticed the racers on the carving cup site don't seem to have large lifters. The FIS rule is 10cm sole to snow. A lifter providing this height should be noticeable in the pictures. Have the racers decided it's dangerous to have so much lift or is there some other reason for not taking advantage of the maximum? Is the waist of the ski wider to help with boot out?

I found this Hangl-System (http://www.spirig-tec.ch/snowconaction/) that looks like fun but I can not read or translate the site to find out if they are available. Is this thing just too crazy? Anyone have any experience with this or similar high lift plates?

Here's a picture if it makes it.

That´s exactly the plate I mentioned in my post Nr. 17: „The highest I ever skied was on a "doubledecker" plate system by Hangl with 94 mm (ski + plate + binding) but there were even higher monsters.“

The lower part was a standard Hangl plate telerod15 mentiones, the upper are two separate and partially adjustable „modules“.

The system, as well as other Hangl plates, were available in the Hangl Sporthaus in Samnaun, Switzerland but I have not seen it there any more for at least 4 years.

There was the question why these ultrahigh lifters are not used in carving races. It´s mainly because it´s still a race (I also already mentioned this) with two 1m high jumps. You need stability on landing and studying more photos than just the few selected you see how many racers have problems on the jumps. Based on my experience with those 94 mm I really wouldn´t want to jump on them.

Before the jumps were introduced there were racers using the maximum height. I remember Ignaz Ganahls skis of about 2000: he used Head cyber Space XTi and the Head Slalom alternately with lifters higher than usual but not the max (about 75 mm if I remember well).

Another factor is that the manufacturers of such plates simply disappeared or gave the production up: the demand was so small that it didn´t pay.

Further, modern boots are narrower and built to prevent boot-out better than older models.

I´m not sure that using shaped slalom skis was the decisive factor in the waning popularity of the carving races. They for sure destroyed the „funcarver“ type of ski because it became almost identical (especially dimension-wise) with the SL-ski. (cf. Ganahl using both according to the type of the course). The new discipline never quite caught up the reasons being – among others – the overcompicated rules which made it hardly suitable for TV coverage. The experiment to arrange it as a dual event (like the pro races you know) promoted by the German ex-worldcupper Gundolf Thoma hasn´t succeeded either.

Btw, I just came back from 6 days on the Kaunertal Glacier in the Austrian Alps. There were quite a lot of skiers - from Austrian wordlcuppers (I chatted with Andy Schifferer on a very long T-bar) to German tourists on a long weekend with the Pfingsten holiday – and I saw just ONE person skiing that „funcarving“ way.

That´s the reality nowadays.
post #35 of 36

Post deleted by spg

post #36 of 36
Thanks Checkracer and others for your replies. Not having tried a high lift risers, I didn't foresee the stability issue but I guess it's kind of obvious. It would probably be fun to take some runs on a high rise setup but not worth the trouble of owning.

I'm going to put together a setup with a little less lifter (65mm± snow to sole), a wider waist ski (75mm±), about a 13m or 14m radius, drop the poles and lay down some trenches.

Anybody have suggestions on skis that fit this criteria: 75± waist and 13-14m± radius?

Some companies list all their ski dimensions others don't seem to give them out at all. I still haven't found a comprehesive source for updated race and high end ski dimensions and construction.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Why carving is not considered skiing