EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Getting new Dobermann 150s on warranty - Agressor or regular?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Getting new Dobermann 150s on warranty - Agressor or regular?

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
So I've done some searches of past threads and I'm still unclear as to who the aggressor is good for. I've had a great season on my WC 150s but both feet have started cracking around the outside of the toe dams and I will be sending them back. I've been quite happy with the regular stance but was wondering if I would benefit from the Aggressor. I ski mostly groomed and GS and SL courses.

Is there a major risk in going with the Aggressor if it is not ideal? Many athletes use the Fischer plug, which does not come in a non-offset stance (I believe)...
post #2 of 17
I think the Agressor mainly benefits a skier whose knees track inward when the toes are pointing straight ahead. If you ski well and are happy with your alignment in the WC 150s, I'd say stick with them.
post #3 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
So I've done some searches of past threads and I'm still unclear as to who the aggressor is good for. I've had a great season on my WC 150s but both feet have started cracking around the outside of the toe dams and I will be sending them back. I've been quite happy with the regular stance but was wondering if I would benefit from the Aggressor. I ski mostly groomed and GS and SL courses.

Is there a major risk in going with the Aggressor if it is not ideal? Many athletes use the Fischer plug, which does not come in a non-offset stance (I believe)...
the fischer & Aggressor offset is done very differently.

the Aggressor is centered in the heel and the forefoot moved out.

With the Fischer plug (which i am very interested in) the heel is moved inside of center and the angle continues outward from there. .

the old Atomic original Tri-tech Betarace 10.5 boot had a 1.5 degree offset shell (I am not sure many people who skied it really realized that) and I believe the current Bi-tech series hasthe offset shell.

Although I am looking to solve a specific probelm with the duck footed stance, it is said it is a more natural stance for most people and makes higher edge angles easier to attain.
post #4 of 17
Thread Starter 
How does use of a varus wedge compare to the effects of an offset stance?
post #5 of 17
I think they address 2 completly different issues. The duck footed stance address the fact that most people naturally stand with their toes point somewhat outward. So rather then pushing the front of your foot towards the centerline they let you stand how you do naturally. Notice where people's skis go when they are just letting them hang off the chair. In a big V.

this is supposed cause less strain on your joints since you are standing mosr naturally. I am not sure it is really meant to solve any other specific or canting problems. i don't think it will!

Varus wedge changes how your foot interfaces with your boot and I believe aids in reducing or elimnating pronation. it adds support under the heel to change the angle or support of the bootom of the foot.

Although I am sure one of the experienced bootfitters will have a better explanation then me!
post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
I'd think that turned out feet are due to pronation, as well as knees tracking inward, due to the collapse of the arch through plantar flexion. A varus wedge does allow toes to point more inward. It is often used to relieve pressure points on the outside of the foot, near the baby toe.

I guess it all comes down to the cause of turned-out feet.

But I'd like to hear from a bootfitter on this one...
post #7 of 17
Most people have slightly duck footed stance naturally. Pronation is the collapse to the inside of the arch when pressured.

You don't have to have pronation to be duckfooted and you can be pronating and not duckfooted.

these are 2 separate issues but can be both present neither present or either present.

I don't think the duck footed stance will do a thing to improve a pronating foot.

and a pronating foot does not necessarily create a duckfooted stance ( maybe never actually)

I am looking at the fischer because my right foot foot really wants to point out, so that when i am put on a straight ski and straight boot I am torqued to the inside which puts undue pressure on my inside edge. Canting does not and will not alleviate this because I am twisted in the horizontal plane. I ski with my right cuff in as far as it will go to get the pressure off of the inside of my right cuff and off my BTE of my right ski! I am hoping the fischer boot will let my right foot turn out and releive the twisting.
post #8 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
I'd think that turned out feet are due to pronation, as well as knees tracking inward, due to the collapse of the arch through plantar flexion. A varus wedge does allow toes to point more inward. It is often used to relieve pressure points on the outside of the foot, near the baby toe.

I guess it all comes down to the cause of turned-out feet.

But I'd like to hear from a bootfitter on this one...
I honestly don't think you're going to find the exact answers your looking for. You're best bet is to try them on and ski them if possible. I've asked similar questions to some well-regarded bootfitters, coaches, and the Nordica race guys; I can't say that I've ever gotten any conclusive answers or explanations. FWIW, most of the Nordica junior athletes were put on Aggressor's this year. Availability of the classic version is now more the exception than the norm.
post #9 of 17
I have heard good things about the Aggressor from a couple of different sources. I have yet to try it, but will post back when I get on a pair this summer at Hood.
post #10 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
I think they address 2 completly different issues. The duck footed stance address the fact that most people naturally stand with their toes point somewhat outward. So rather then pushing the front of your foot towards the centerline they let you stand how you do naturally. Notice where people's skis go when they are just letting them hang off the chair. In a big V.

this is supposed cause less strain on your joints since you are standing mosr naturally. I am not sure it is really meant to solve any other specific or canting problems. i don't think it will!

Varus wedge changes how your foot interfaces with your boot and I believe aids in reducing or elimnating pronation. it adds support under the heel to change the angle or support of the bootom of the foot.

Although I am sure one of the experienced bootfitters will have a better explanation then me!
I concur with your thinking! I have recently been skiing in the Nordica Aggressor and still need the same canting adjustments as my non offset boots. I did not notice a big difference in how they skied with the offset like I had anticipated. I do like the way they feel and ski though!!!

I have sold this boot to a lady who was bowlegged (rare) and needed canted in by a couple degrees but when I went out and skied with her she looked and felt great in the boots. So I would not pigeon hole this boot for only people who track "outside in" or any other anomoly.

b
post #11 of 17
I feel the only way to recommend these "offset" boots is to measure the effect they place on the body's biomechanics and make a educated decision from there. I designed a device to measure abduction in the foot with and without a boot on. First I fabricate and post a footbed to obtain a more neutral and "natural" stance and correct for as much abduction as possible. Then I place the footbed in the shell and balance the upper cuff. Last, the liner is placed into the shell and a measurement is made as to how symmetrical (abduction/adduction) the boots are in respect to each other. If I feel that the "offset" shell adds to symmetrical alignment, then a recommendation is made for that type of boot. This brief description does not include all the steps for a fully balanced boot, but does provide a quick overview to the "offset" boot decision process.
post #12 of 17
How do you make the measurement to assess symetry of abb and adduction? What does your device do? Tell me more...

bud
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
So I've done some searches of past threads and I'm still unclear as to who the aggressor is good for. I've had a great season on my WC 150s but both feet have started cracking around the outside of the toe dams and I will be sending them back. I've been quite happy with the regular stance but was wondering if I would benefit from the Aggressor. I ski mostly groomed and GS and SL courses.

Is there a major risk in going with the Aggressor if it is not ideal? Many athletes use the Fischer plug, which does not come in a non-offset stance (I believe)...
If your stance and balance was fine in the WCs, get another pair. The Aggressors will change those, and you'll need the work to get them set up for you, of course, regardless. While Bud makes note of options, I think that if you track straight in the WCs I would not recommend the Aggressors (which, FWIW, I ski).
post #14 of 17
The Aggressors aren't designed to compensate for a duckfooted stance- they're designed to give a faster edge initiation for tech events (Lange also did a lot of testing with this idea and scrapped it- maybe we'll see it someday). A lot of Nordica athletes use the Aggressor for tech and the WC for speed. Could they be used to correct something? Maybe. But think about this- how many feet have you seen that naturally point straight on when just standing casually? That's the idea behind Fischer's soma- everyone's feet point out, so every boot should have it. I don't think Fischer would only make boots designed to fix a problem that only some people have.

I guess the point of that little rant was that if you're really a carving junkie who doesn't mind getting used to a new feeling in order to gain that slight edge, go for the Aggressor. If not, stick with the WC. Your stance as little to do with the decision.
post #15 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takecontrol618 View Post
The Aggressors aren't designed to compensate for a duckfooted stance- they're designed to give a faster edge initiation for tech events (Lange also did a lot of testing with this idea and scrapped it- maybe we'll see it someday). A lot of Nordica athletes use the Aggressor for tech and the WC for speed. Could they be used to correct something? Maybe. But think about this- how many feet have you seen that naturally point straight on when just standing casually? That's the idea behind Fischer's soma- everyone's feet point out, so every boot should have it. I don't think Fischer would only make boots designed to fix a problem that only some people have.

I guess the point of that little rant was that if you're really a carving junkie who doesn't mind getting used to a new feeling in order to gain that slight edge, go for the Aggressor. If not, stick with the WC. Your stance as little to do with the decision.
Takecontrol618:I disagree with some parts of your reply...

What your body's mechanics do when standing statically without skier weight/centrifical force/gravity/ski boot geometry...etc. does not dictate your biomechanic position when under the influence of the mentioned forces. Just look at the phases of gait...Heel strike....flat foot...toe off. (simplified) The body is going through all kinds of motions. To assume that this is the same position we stay in while under the prior mentioned forces is not correct.

The "offset" boots that you mentioned are designed to correct for "something". They do this in two ways. The Fischer Soma rotates the skiers foot from a pivot point located at the center of the boot.(This is abducting the forefoot and adducting the hind foot.) The Nordica Aggressor pivots the foot from the heel. (This is abducting the foot starting from the hind foot and continueing through the forefoot.)

In my research, about 80% of skiers will exhibit excessive abduction.
I measure for this (abduction/adduction), and with the use of a posted, abduction/adduction controlling footbed/orthotic, create a system that addresses the skier need. If more abduction/adduction control is needed, a boot recommendation is made. (ie..Fischer Soma/Nordica Aggressor)

Lastly, abduction/adduction is not symmetrical. Each skier is different/each foot is different.

These two boot manufacturers (Fischer and Nordica) have given me options in ways to correct for this excessive rotational movement.
post #16 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takecontrol618 View Post
The Aggressors aren't designed to compensate for a duckfooted stance- they're designed to give a faster edge initiation for tech events (Lange also did a lot of testing with this idea and scrapped it- maybe we'll see it someday). A lot of Nordica athletes use the Aggressor for tech and the WC for speed. Could they be used to correct something? Maybe. But think about this- how many feet have you seen that naturally point straight on when just standing casually? That's the idea behind Fischer's soma- everyone's feet point out, so every boot should have it. I don't think Fischer would only make boots designed to fix a problem that only some people have.
I can somewhat agree with this statement as it's pretty much what I've been told by the few people that I know using the offset stance boots. Quicker engagement at the top of the turn is what they say. Some of these guys were skiing sub 50 points beforehand so it's not like they were having serious balance issues with their old boots. I'm pretty sure none of them are too concerned about compensating for excessive foot abduction. They feel that the boots are quicker and help get them down a race course in less time plain and simple.

That said, I still think it's something you need to try and decide for yourself. I plan on doing that this summer. You can make corrections for any alignment issues in a shop, but the final test will always be how it performs on snow.
post #17 of 17
What is the qualifier for excessive abduction? It seems that if 80% of the people you measured experience it, it would be more likely that the other 20% are experiencing abnormal adduction. The madness never ends when there's bad skiers willing to blame problems on gear, I guess- and someone's always more than happy to "fix" it for them.
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 › Getting new Dobermann 150s on warranty - Agressor or regular?