EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Did the binding do the right thing.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Did the binding do the right thing.

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
I was skiing fast through crud today. While making a right turn my left ski hit what appeared to be just another lump in the snow. It was actually a frozen chunk. When I hit it my binding immediately released causing me an interesting crash when resulted in a concussion. Should the binding have released? I am almost positive that I could have absorbed that chunk if my skis stayed on my feet.
post #2 of 29
You very well might have been able to absorb it. But maybe not. In all likelihood, the binding did what it was supposed to do. FWIW - earlier in the season I hit a chunk of buried avy debris in that field that now and again slides toward Tye Mill Chair. Instant eject & full flip. I was and I am pretty sure that I could have taken the deflection & gotten back under control. But I'm pretty sure the binding "did the right thing". Also had a hit like that on a small buried stump last run that same day. Same result. Same conclusion. Subjectivity aside, I suspect it is hard to second guess the outcome on a high speed hit if the binding didn't release...

+++Vibes+++ on the concussion. If it is officially diagnosed, don't push it. Repeats = very bad.
post #3 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
I hit a chunk of buried avy debris in that field that now and again slides toward Tye Mill Chair.
hey me too
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
+++Vibes+++ on the concussion. If it is officially diagnosed, don't push it. Repeats = very bad.
Can ski patrol give official diagnoses? Aren't they just basically nurses w/ big egos

on the flipside. I had just made a very cool personal first decent of rockface so the day was not a total wash
post #4 of 29
I had a double eject a few weeks ago when I hit a hard step of old snow under some new powder. I could have absorbed it with a simple leg retraction if I knew it was there, but I never saw it coming. I'm pretty sure the bindings did the right thing. Something has to give when the ski stops and your body keeps moving. Like you, I rung my bell pretty hard when I crashed (not to the point of concussion though).
post #5 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post
ISomething has to give when the ski stops and your body keeps moving. .
The thing is I dont think my ski had to stop moving. If the bidning had stayed on the tip would have just risen over the SMALL cookie and I would have been saved.
post #6 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
on the flipside. I had just made a very cool personal first decent of rockface so the day was not a total wash
worthless without pics...

Where was it?
post #7 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post
worthless without pics...

Where was it?
not my pic but this one
post #8 of 29
Sorry to hear about your concussion. Like Spindrift says, take it easy. Been there.

Most arguments about "prerelease" imply that sometimes a binding should ignore a given force and other times pay attention, depending on what its owner wants. Unfortunately, bindings are just dumb hunks of metal and plastic designed to move far enough to release when it gets enough force applied to it. Sounds like yours got enough force, and it released. End of story.
post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
not my pic but this one
Very cool :
post #10 of 29
I have a very good friend who hit a small chunk of something under the snow while skiing Teton Pass. He's an extremely good skier. He also pays his bills by waiting tables and skis everyday at JH...

His ski did NOT release... his ankle did. Missing a month of pay kinda sucks.

See, the forces that knocked the ski off weren't transfered to you, the binding releasing dissipated those forces. Those forces need to go somewhere, if it didn't release something else might have. It happens.

I'd rather clear a few cobwebs and walk uphill to put my ski back on, but hey, maybe I'm not hardcore enough.
post #11 of 29
See this thread, and ask yourself; Did My Binding do the Right Thing?

http://forums.epicski.com/showthread.php?t=68648
post #12 of 29
Any ski I ski fast in crud has Look (Pivot or PX2) or Rossi (Axial or Axial 2) bindings because I blow out of the heel too easily in Salomon bindings and way to easily in Marker bindings when my DIN is set normally. I don't like the idea of having to crank up my DIN to stay in my bindings (which some people suggest.) I can't remember a situation where I felt the Looks or Rossis release and I thought I could have skied out of it.

I do have a question. Were you wearing a helmet???
post #13 of 29
I was going the same place Rio was regarding the concussion. :
post #14 of 29
Doubt this adds much after Whiteroom's link ... but it's all a tradeoff.

Two years ago at Snowbasin I had a similar experience as yours, bombing the downhill run on Looks set at relatively low DIN (type II skier setting for my age and weight). Outside of a turn, one ski on smooth groomed and other ski veered outside the groomed into rougher stuff because I couldn't really see that boundary at speed in fog, etc. Result = high speed yard sale, knocked the wind (and ego) out of me; but no harm; and I concluded I should re-set the bindings to type III or III+ avoid injuries because I definitely could've skied through it had the ski stayed on.

Later the same day - still set at Type II, hadn't gotten around to cranking it up - slow speed, watching my kids instead of my own line, minor undramatic fall with insufficient force to release the binding. But enough to release my ACL, leading to reconstruction, rehab, major expense and lost time.

It's a tradeoff - Type II was still to high a tension to avoid theACL injury. I still keep most bindings on Type II, crank up to III only occasionally and with specific reasons in mind (e.g., having prerelease problems in moguls). Both involve risks but I think in general I'm safer in a yard sale than the kind of twisting injury that got me (and got Dawgcatching even worse if you read Whiteroom's link).
post #15 of 29
Slow skiers get hurt when their bindings don't come off when they should, and fast skiers tend to get hurt when their bindings come off when they shouldn't. From your description it sounds like your binding definitely should have come off. If you don't like it then tighten them up. You buy your ticket and you take your chances.
post #16 of 29
^You buy your ticket and you take your chances.
post #17 of 29
Too bad there is no video in slo-mo of all of our releases where we could have "hung on".

I have a feeling that with the speed most things happen, we would find that the binding was just doing it's job .... we just couldn't process fast enough to realize it.
post #18 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rio View Post
Any ski I ski fast in crud has Look (Pivot or PX2) or Rossi (Axial or Axial 2) bindings because I blow out of the heel too easily in Salomon bindings and way to easily in Marker bindings when my DIN is set normally. I don't like the idea of having to crank up my DIN to stay in my bindings (which some people suggest.) I can't remember a situation where I felt the Looks or Rossis release and I thought I could have skied out of it.

I do have a question. Were you wearing a helmet???
Yes on the helmet. Yes on the looks.

Here's one just to trigger some thought though: If I was on softer skis w/ more rise in the tip, would the ski have rode over the bump rather than slamming into it (therefore applying less force to the binding)
post #19 of 29
I think the binding did the right thing, you just didn't realize how hard it hit you. How hard a hit you take is often subjective. The impact was enough to make you crash. It would take a very hard impact to make me crash, instead of continuing on with one ski until I could safely stop.
post #20 of 29
Quote:
If I was on softer skis w/ more rise in the tip, would the ski have rode over the bump rather than slamming into it (therefore applying less force to the binding)
I've actually found the opposite. Much of the problem I've had with blowing out my heel is skiing fast in crud on softer skis.

If you were on Looks and the DIN & forward pressure were set right chances are your binding did the right thing. I know a couple skiers that got nasty boot-top fractures when their bindings didn't release hitting buried avalanche debris.
post #21 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post
I have a very good friend who hit a small chunk of something under the snow while skiing Teton Pass. He's an extremely good skier. He also pays his bills by waiting tables and skis everyday at JH...

His ski did NOT release... his ankle did. Missing a month of pay kinda sucks.

See, the forces that knocked the ski off weren't transfered to you, the binding releasing dissipated those forces. Those forces need to go somewhere, if it didn't release something else might have. It happens.

I'd rather clear a few cobwebs and walk uphill to put my ski back on, but hey, maybe I'm not hardcore enough.
Sorry to hear about your friend...but I'm guessing he was skiing a much higher relative Din than the poster of this thread.
post #22 of 29
If I recall my physics (never a sure thing), PhilT is right in his assumption that a stiffer ski should transmit more force to the binding (but as well as back into the chunk). I'd also guess that Rio's experience with softer skis in crud comes more from longitudinal or torsional flexing past the binding's limit than from shock being transmitted to the binding (more flex should actually absorb more shock). The answer is that everyone should ski K2's, which absorb all known feedback from the snow without being too soft.

Which reminds me: What ever happened to Dynastar red bubbles? Always thought that little moving weight was a cool idea, wonder why they moved on.
post #23 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
I was skiing fast through crud today. While making a right turn my left ski hit what appeared to be just another lump in the snow. It was actually a frozen chunk. When I hit it my binding immediately released causing me an interesting crash when resulted in a concussion. Should the binding have released? I am almost positive that I could have absorbed that chunk if my skis stayed on my feet.
These threads are extremely silly. Of course it SHOULD have released....because it DID.....duh.

What would be a MUCH more resonable question???:

1. Am I happy with the release/non-release that just occured?

2. Are my bindings FUNCTIONING properly?

3. Do I have the correct TYPE of BINDING for the kind of skiing I do?

4. Are my din settings correct????????????????

It's pretty simple. Go down the list:

1. If no, proceed to step two.

2. Get your gear checked, if they are ok, proceed to step three.

3. Do you have Markers? Low end Salomons? Are you very agressive? Not agressive? Are your din's nearly maxed out already? Are they at the minmum? Figure it out. Real skiers need real bindings, period.

4. Increase or decrease Din as desired. Re-evaluate change in din next time you release or thought you should have.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

That's how I got to a 13 din and a collection of race stock bindings. I started increasing the quality of my bindings, and the din settings, because when I released, I wasn't ususally happy about it. Now, I barely ever release. It's just that simple!!!

But still, on some speed oriented skis, I'm considering going to a S920 (12-20 din), set to around 17, because I feel my S916's toe float at high speed....not very comforting......!
post #24 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post

It's pretty simple. Go down the list:

1. If no, proceed to step two. Duh

2. Get your gear checked, if they are ok, proceed to step three. Gear is fine

3. Do you have Markers? No Low end Salomons? No Are you very agressive? Yes Not agressive? Are your din's nearly maxed out already? No Are they at the minmum? No Figure it out. Real skiers need real bindings, period.

4. Are my din settings correct???????????????? That is what this thread was asking. Should I tighten my bindings in order to prevent a recurrence? or should I accept that this would have knocked my ski off at nearly any din that wouldn't break my leg

Wash, rinse, repeat.

That's how I got to a 13 din and a collection of race stock bindings. I started increasing the quality of my bindings, and the din settings, because when I released, I wasn't ususally happy about it. Now, I barely ever release. It's just that simple!!! ur hardcore

But still, on some speed oriented skis, I'm considering going to a S920 (12-20 din) 14-20 fyi, set to around 17, because I feel my S916's toe float at high speed....not very comforting......!
...........
post #25 of 29
It seems to me that unless you went back and dug up the chunk to see where the shovel hit the chunk (i.e. was it trapped under a lip, was it starting to ride up, was the chunk small enough to break...) there is no way to know for sure.

Personally, I would not increase my DIN based on one prerelease, no matter how outrageous it seemed. I would want to see a pattern first. And then make changes gradually.

(I am at III+, but only because I hit age 50. Before the derating, I was right at III on the charts. Of course, I am not super agresssive -- I could envision going up one or even 2 more points if I was dropping air, but I think you guys skiing 50% over your charted level are asking for big trouble.)
post #26 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
...........
So....you answered your own question. Time to crank up your bindings...
post #27 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Highway Star View Post
So....you answered your own question. Time to crank up your bindings...
Not at all. My question is should I turn it up inorder to prevent the same situation from reoccurring considering the risk it poses to my knee,? Im pretty wary of going over 15 yet im also scared of the consequences of a repeat is.
post #28 of 29
This thread is awesome. Highway Star is going to ride 920s. Truly an hero. (NSFW)
post #29 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
Not at all. My question is should I turn it up inorder to prevent the same situation from reoccurring considering the risk it poses to my knee,? Im pretty wary of going over 15 yet im also scared of the consequences of a repeat is.
So your bindings are only set to 15? I think you need to go higher....
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 › Did the binding do the right thing.