or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Boot Alignment: A Working Case
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Boot Alignment: A Working Case

post #1 of 36
Thread Starter 
A very pragmatic thread which I am afraid will get lost in the roar of the other alignment thread but here goes:

Just got back from a few days on the snow and did some work on alignment. I would like to present the set of symptoms observed and the very limited tools which were used to make changes. I would appreciate it if those of you with some experience in this area might comment on what they would have expected with various changes and why I found what I found. If I can direct the discussion I would like to limit it to the constraints of the actual situation and not talk about what should have or could have been done in a better case scenario.


Starting point:

Custom footbeds made by an experienced boot fitter/alignment specialist. Foot bets are compliant and allow some degree of pronation/supination.

Boots with a wide range of cuff angle adjustability which could easily be performed in seconds on the slope.

Previous static (based on both Witherall and Harb) alignment tests, both suggesting the need for 1.5 to 2 degrees of canting, thick side out, on both sides.

Previous on hill testing suggesting pretty much the same but with an increase to 2.5 - 3 degrees.

Heel lifts between boot board and liner based on empirical testing demonstrated marked improvement in fore/aft stance alignment based on personal feel and feedback from experts.

2-3 degree lateral cants, originally placed between binding and ski, thick side out moved inside the boot between boot board and boot liner.

Cuff cant adjusted to center lower leg in boot shaft with footbed in the shell (cants underneath) but no liner. Initial cuff adjustment done with "natural ski stance" close to hip width or a little narrower.


The problem with this set-up was that 1) the boot-fit on the left was somewhat uncomfortable due to the internal canting and 2) the right side alignment and turns seemed locked-in but the left did not seem quite as good. As a consequence the internal cant on the left boot was removed (no change in cuff angle) and on-slope alignment tests performed. Results were:

Riding a single ski on a very low angle slope showed good balance and edge control with body directly balanced over the ski on the right but with body more to the outside on the left. Also producing inside edge on the left was difficult and balance was not "locked-in" as well as on the right.

Results on a straight one-legged traverse across a medium pitched slope showed similar reslults. Right side was "locked-in" with good stability, a feeling of strong skeletal support at hip and knee, and a stable straight track across the slope. On the left, alignment was farther to the outside, had much less sense of stability, and produced a much more wavering track.

These results were notably worse with the internal cant removed vs. with it there.

Finally the cuff angle was adjusted to move the cuff as far outside as it could go. The results were better than having the internal cant on the boot board and the cuff centered on the lower leg. Left side alignment was the closest it has been to the right but still not quite as good. (There was a feeling that an increased ramp angle (lift under the boot heel) would help move the pressuring point more forward and equal to the right. Placing a 2-3 degree canting strip under each side of the boot heel did produce positive results in this direction but left was still not quite as balanced or feel as good in a turn as the right.

Note: Canting strips were not used under the boot heel in evaluation (except to simulate increased ramp angle) as the practicality of under binding canting strips and permanent boot planing/grinding were not felt to be reasonable choices at this time. If a boot with more flexibility for adjustable canting that has proper fit can be found in the future, that will be seriously considered.
post #2 of 36
Every boot board (beneath the liner) differs, I suppose, but reading through your descriptions I wonder about the possibility of grinding angles in the board rather than inserting wedges or whatever the in-the-boot cant process was???? What I mean is that rather than add to the stuff that's in the boot, why not take away a bit to create the internal canting. Might take care of the comfort issue.
post #3 of 36
Thread Starter 
Thanks Kneale,

Excellent suggestion. My problem continues to be that until I feel the left "lock-in" like the right I don't want to make any changes that are not reversible. Also, with these boot boards and their lattice underside that locks in, I am not sure I can make it work (although I will reconsider this once again with you comment). If, however, I can really satisfy myself on alignment I will take your suggestion and see what I can do in this respect.

This points out the reason that I would like true adjustablility in a boot in terms of lateral sole canting, ramp angle, and cuff angle. With that, I think I could lock in alignment on my own.
post #4 of 36
Si, hey it is me again. I feel I have given you enough info to make you dangerous. Here are some tips to help you make some decisions.

First; a better test may be instead of a traverse on a hill find something very flat with a true fall line. Rail Road track land. Here you want to do a one footed straight run. This will tell you a lot about what is happening. What you are looking for is the ability to ride a flat ski with as little "ginking" as possible
Ginking; To use excessive body English to establish balance watch ankle knee and shoulders and hand position.

The ideal is to be able to ride a flat ski and be relaxed in the foot, ankle, knee, hip, trunk, and the Hands say a lot.

So if you can not ride this ski flat, usually people will find this happening;

They first gyrate to try to keep the ski flat. Once they loose this battle the ski begins to hook up and what ever shape the ski has will take over.

Why? well if the foot is pronating inside the boot the pressure will be biased to the inside of the ski. and the shape will take over.

What you are looking for is that relaxed feeling like you can let go and the ski will still go straight.

So weather you are canting internally or externally this is the goal. Flat baby flat

Oh yeah we test both feet.

the next test is not for kids.

try a one footed rail road track. we are looking for symmetry from both edges. Very difficult if the foot is not positioned properly inside the boot first.

Good luck may balance be with you. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #5 of 36
si, i've been doing a lot of tinkering with my alignment too and don't like permanent changes till it's right. to experiment with bootboard changes in cant i cut an insole out of very thin plastic, report covers work well, then build up the angle with staggerd layers of duct tape.my canting is 2.5 hi outside too, and i find many boots have varying amounts of build up on the inside edge of boot board which some shops compensate in the footbed if not it can increase your canting needs. i use duct tape on the sole for canting comparison, put it on while the boot is warm, ski then peel off on the hill mid run. for cuff changes i found some long heel wedges(about 6" and 1/4" thick) used one at a time for modest change or one up one down for big change. these are also very easy to pull out on the hill for instant feedback. i've pretty good with canting now i'm stuggling with fore and aft i found some of dm's comments helpful
on forward lean, wish we could get something going on ramp angle.
post #6 of 36
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the comments Mosh. We actually did quite a bit of 1 footed skiing as there were only a few runs open and it was a good way to work on our skiing and alignment at the same time. Perhaps the reason I am convinced that my right alignment is better than the left is that on my right/one footed skiing I can, as you said, "ride a flat ski and be relaxed in the foot, ankle, knee, hip, trunk, and the hands". That is true even though I have a right hip replacement and therefore slightly weaker hip on that side. Through this process I have found my performance on left/one footed skiing to range from a real struggle to close to that on the right. Even at its best, however, I still can't achieve the same degree of "relaxed" feeling on the left as on the right. That's why the search continues. Note that most of this one footed skiing is with the other ski just lifted off the snow. However, we also took off one ski at times - obviously more difficult (at least with my skills) and not as easy to connect turns continuously - but I think it magnifies the alignment deficits.

What confuses me most about my empirical testing, however, is that the cuff angle adjustment that helps the most (moving the cuff to the outside) seems opposite to the effect of sole canting with the thick side out.
post #7 of 36
Thread Starter 
One comment on my motivation for this thread. I certainly am interested in learning more about alignment from my own experiences. However, I also want to show that it is feasible to work on alignment for yourself. With the right tools (enough of which don't really exist yet to do readily do the job through simple boot or binding adjustments) and some good instruction I think it is very possible to "arm" someone to continually tweek their alignment over time. Now I'm not suggesting that a skier should be constantly thinking about alignment, but an early season alignment day at a local hill or when there is limited terrain not only sets you up for efficient use of your equipment but it lets you focus on your sensations of pressure, edging, body postion, movement flow and many other things that these kinds of drills tend to bring out.
post #8 of 36
Firstoff, I recognise it can be a long and winding road to optimal alignment. That said, I must suggest that moving the canting from under binding to inside the boot can lead you onto an endless detour that never gets you back to the main road. The fact we can still drive and get somewhere on a detour doesn't mean it is where we wanted to go.

I'll start with brief discription from Witherell/Evrard's "The Athletic Skier" description of the "alignment cycle".
1. Assesment of skiers physical structure.
2. Footbed to stablize the foot in netrual position, with some free adaptation as yours aparently do have.
3. Fore/Aft balance by adjusting ramp angle and foreward lean.
4. Cuff adjustment to match angle of lower leg shaft with leg as centered as much as possible.
5. Cant to put plumb-bob from center of knee mass a little inside center seam of boot sole. (1/4" if knockneed to 3/4" if bowlegged)

The net of this cycle is optimal anatomical alignment of foot and ankle, boot adjusted to match lower leg and re-inforce that alignment, and bottom of ski adjusted (canted) to be at optimal angle in relation to the center of knee mass. Outcome should be fairly equal ability to easily balance on one footed big or little toe shallow traverses in both directions on either foot.

So, back to your specific case: If your footbeds were built to acomplish correct anatomical alignment of your foot and ankle, putting cants inside the boot basically "posts" your footbed and disrupts the integrity of foot alignment intended by the footbeds.
Canting inside the boot essentialy inverts or everts the foot/ankle out of optimal alignment. In your case, thick outside, your foot is pre-loaded as everted. Most people have less range of motion avaliable to evert their feet, so you might have very little left to balance with. Your pre-everted foot may staticaly "feel" strong on the big toe side (as the leg bone now points at inside edge), but I'd bet you are weak trying to balance on a one footed little toe traverse. Overall balancing agility of the foot is also compromised.

You can see where I'm going here. I strongly recommend completing the cycle by canting, as needed, outside the boot. Either under bindings, or by grinding boot, which I do so I can try any pair of skis. Alternative is to check out the one boot with a truely cantable sole adjustment system (Dalbello?)

There are a lot of quick and dirty methods of fooling with cuff adjustment and internal canting (posting). However, they all are compromises to the balance and agility potential only avaliable from a quality full cycle alignment. While these bandaids may provide some improvment, they still enlist compensating movements.

I think if you were to take cants out of boots, align cuff to match lower leg angle, and cant your skis 2-1/2 degrees thick out, you would be able to fine tune with 1, 2 or 3 layers of tape until you find your best combo of all four one footed big/little toe traverses. Then shim your cants accordingly with .010, .020, .030 thin brass stock (1/4, 1/2, 3/4 degree).

Good luck, wish I could get on snow with you and help out.
I'm near milwaukee, where in MI are you?

[ December 03, 2002, 10:15 PM: Message edited by: Arcmeister ]
post #9 of 36
In 20 plus years of measuring this with a variety of tools I've only seen one instance where putting something inside the boot made a difference in what the wands/plumb-bob/framing square told me.(my wife,a nurse for 30+ years,whose feet pronate badly).
Did you recheck the alignment with the "cants" in the boots? I bet 2 degrees in the boot doesn't give the same reading as 2 deg under the binding.
Did it work with cants under the bindings? I use the Witherall method and have personally tried the "0" and even the "plus" setting. I stick with Warren. That works for me and most everyone I use it on. I couldn't pass Level III until I got it that way. In fact I just changed a masters racer from the Detroit area from "0" to -2 this past weekend. The results were pretty dramatic. I'd go back to your bootfitter and get your footbeds and alignment fixed. If you don't want cants under your bindings put layers of ductape under your heel and toe of the boot to get your 2-2.5 deg(should take about 9 to 12 layers if you're starting from 0 deg)When you find the right amount, depending on what boot you have, grind,shim or change sole pieces to get there. If you grind or shim you have to work the tops to get to D.I.N.(I use lifter plates when I grind)
Last year I canted one of my racers Atomic boots with washers under the sole pieces. He went out to Winter Park and had some footbeds made at a shop out there. The guy told him he didn't need the washers and took them out. This summer at Hood his coach, a DCL from Vail, said he was having trouble with his hip being outside on turns. I put him on my wands and he was right where he had been before I put the washers in. I used ductape to put him at -2 and the hip problem disappeared. This fall I put the washers back and told him when he's at WP not to let anyone monkey with his boots.
I see you're in Michigan. Do you ever get to the UP? I carry my wands with me all the time. The first two weekends in Jan I'll be at Indianhead. Between Christmas and New Years I'll be at Marquette. I don't know if I'm going to Boyne in Feb yet. Either there or Ripley. My jointer and router are pretty portable too. If I knew I'd need them I could bring them.
When it's right most problems fix themselves with little or no effort on your part. I've been doing this a long time and have seen a lot of "fads". Most of them don't hold water.

Just read Arcmeisters post. Right on. Rog you've got such a way with words.

[ December 03, 2002, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: SLATZ ]
post #10 of 36
Thread Starter 
Thanks Roger and Slatz,

Your comments are very helpful and in general describe the path I would prefer to take. It's fantastic to be able to get such great feedback.

The reality of my situation (and perhaps others), however, does quite follow the ideal path. When I had cants under my bindings (3 years ago) the improvement was dramatic but my left and right were still not quite equal (and as I've since learned there was still room for improvement on the "good" side). That is why I was hesitant to wedge/grind my boots. Also since that time I have switched from a rigid to compliant footbed (which is now probably somewhat compromised to some degree based on the internal canting interaction and the requisite changes that I have had to make for fit). Another factor is that as I playwith /adjust footbeds, heel lift, ramp angle, binding location, etc. I am not sure that my canting needs won't change slightly. Finally the biggest factor that has prevented me from taking this step is that I continue to get better in sensing and understanding what is going on down at my feet and skis and really feel that as I continue to become more aware I may want to experiment further with different changes.

So, at this point I would really like to find the equipment to allow me to start over on the path you both have described but still leave me some adjustability for future and ongoing change.

For anyone who is listening in on this thread and wonders about the cost side of all this I would also like to add a few comments. To do this right on a "retail" basis can be pretty expensive. To start with, a footbed can run anywhere from $70 to $200 or more. Then a static/indoor alignment check might run another $25 to $100 depending on whether somewhat uses cant wands, a Tekscan system, or other technology. An on-slope alignmment analysis can run another $75-$300 depending on the format and time involved. When you're all done it's not unlikely you might find you are unhappy with your boots (too much of a rotary component, cuff not upright enough, etc.) and you have to possible redo some of the steps above.

As you can see, the kind of advice and discussion I am getting here on Epic is quite valuable! But because of this potential spiralling cost I am becoming more and more interested in buying (or modifying my own) boots to allow ongoing tweaking and modification in as many areas as possible.
post #11 of 36
I haven't seen the Dalebello boot with the adjustment on it. However the article in The Professional Skier last winter made it sound like it might be your answer. Ductape on the boot sole is the best "quick and dirty" way I've found to experiment. I use 1" strips at the AFD point and equal amounts on the heel. As for footbeds, I've heard that you want a little leeway in them.(not absolute tightness). I've only had two pairs in the last 20 years(100+ days per year).
As for "do it yourself", a plumbob might be your best bet. I have a tibia caliper and Obermeyer wands. I can mark my knee and get on them by myself without help. I have used a framing square on a flat "surface plate" too.
Good luck, keep us posted.
My offer still stands, I'll work for beer.
post #12 of 36

I hate to say it, but not very much can be done without the proper measurements, ie, calcaneus/tibia angle and calcaneus/metatarsal angle while in subtalur nuetral. Anything less is guesswork. And guessing could have not so pleasant consequenses. My suggestion is to contact the maker of your footbed and ask advice as to how to proceed. If it is who I think it is, they keep very good records. Your footbed, as mine, is probably compressed.

I, as did the maker of the footbed, added 1.5 deg x .75 inch shims under the medial side of the footbed to compensate for compression to increase varus accomadation. Not knowing your foot measurements, I would be very reluctant to recommend anything, except to contact the maker of the footbed.
post #13 of 36
Thread Starter 
One of the Dalbello models does have a truly cantable sole. It is however quite heavy and cumbersome. Also as one model it obviously doesn't have the fit for everyone (my low volume foot included). I generally have used the framing square approach to check alignment at home. One shortcoming that I have heard and read about is that even if you measure for the center of the knee and or tibial palteau it may not represent the functional center of some people's knees. Of course, that's why on-slope alignment needs to be the final test.

Also, I certainly take note of both your's and Roger's offers. they are certainly intriguing and makes me wonder if a weekend drive to Wisconsin sometime might not be worthwhile. Thanks again for the discussion and offer to help. Unfortunately, we don't get up to Upper Peninsula or even Northern Michigan for skiing generally. We have found, that except for the flights, it's just about the same to go west.
post #14 of 36

SBS (Shim Balance System)

Does anybody have any thoughts or experience with the SBS system (http://www.footfoundation.com/ski-al.htm)/?

There is obviously a convenience factor to utilizing in boot shims (no grinding required, portable from one pair of boots to another, easy to fine tune, etc.) However, even if you have easily adjustable upper cuffs on your boots so that your leg alignment is not a factor, I do not see how this system
addresses the optimal foot/ankle issues discussed above? Would this system work satisfactorily when dealing with smaller degrees of canting (say 1 - 2 degrees)?
post #15 of 36
Hi Skier--The SBS system is actually the brainchild of Mosh (Eric Ward), who made the 4th post in this thread. I haven't noticed him around EpicSki much recently, but you might send him a PM.

Eric is extremely knowledgeable about boots and alignment, and he's an excellent skier and instructor as well. It's a pretty remarkable system that he's developed--does a surprisingly good job for many people in a very short time. I hope you can reach him.

Best regards,
Bob Barnes
post #16 of 36


There is so much credible information on this subject on the internet, I'm not advocating one method over the other, but why would you ask advice about something that can change your skiing, from regular folks on this forum, when you can evaluate it from a scienific persective. There are sites on this topic, International Congresses on skiing etc. that have researched the effects of Alignment legitimately?
post #17 of 36

Blocking the foot

Skier, The SBS is exactly the opposite of what is happening on the World Cup. Have a look at the realskiers site on the PMTS forum for some insight.
post #18 of 36

Boot alignment: A working case

Can you elaborate on that ? What is the address of the site ?
post #19 of 36
Bob:Thanks for the referral to Mosh. I have sent him a PM.

carv_lust: I must admit that I have not been reading the PMTS forum but have now done so. Some interesting points of view. Thanks.

I also tried to find other web material, including International Congress of Skiing info, but could only find one abstract written by Harold that was a discussion of the benefits of having a static and dynamic assessment to correctly diagnose alignment problems. Do you have any specific references to other ICSS materials or web sites for further research on these issues?

Biowolf: carv_lust was referring to this site: http://www.realskiers.com/pmtsforum/
post #20 of 36
About a year ago there was an interesting discussion about Eric's system here at EpicSki in the thread, "Weems, Please tell us about alignment in beginner lessons."

Somewhat after that discussion took place, I had the opportunity to discuss his system with Eric in person, and to see it demonstrated. The result was most impressive--in about 20 minutes, indoors, Eric's patented machine (along with Eric's own sharp and well-educated eye) arrived at the exact same conclusions about my personal alignment needs that other top boot gurus have prescribed after hours of measurement and observation both "statically" (inside) and "dynamically" (out on the snow). Even Eric seemed a little surprised by that!

Best regards,
Bob Barnes
post #21 of 36
Hi Si,
you have more experts here than anyone can imagine,
but I thought I'd throw my 2 rusty cents worth in to the pot.
First, I totally agree with arc, that you can't get the result you're looking for inside the boot. It will just continue to confuse the issue.
second, even in perfect alignment, many if not most will have one side that feels better than the other. you say your stronger side is the weaker in one footed turns? that signals to me that your other leg may not be helping, while you're on your weaker side, you're stronger leg (even with no ski on it) is probably doing a better job of assisting your intentions.
yes, you are probably right, you may still be out of alignment, just remember to work as well with both the light and the heavy foot to create the action.
and third, I know it's counterintuitive for us overly type a people,
but, find an individual who you believe in enough to let them take your info, use their hard won expertise and grind you boots. then trust it and figure you need to dial in the technique on your off foot because your alignment is dialed..
I feel that you will use too much time messing with it otherwise.

I came to this one day after overtweaking for years and skiing with a buddy who you respect (ericd) he called me on it. he, and many just compensate . yes, maybe they start out closer to aligned, but technique, not alignment rules.

just my 2 cents.


post #22 of 36
Thread Starter 
Hi Wade,

If you notice I posted this thread a long time ago (2002). I have pretty much followed the path you talk about. I have canted 1 boot (not by grinding but by shimming the boot under the heel and toe pieces, keeping the rubber toe and heel pieces in place for better hiking traction). I haven't gotten to the other side yet as I've tried other things there. I am now convinced that I should just cant that boot sole as well. Just like you said, I ended up going to someone I trusted. I just didn't want to put on the hard plastic bottoms he used which would are very slippery and not good for hiking.

BTW, as a tennis player and skier you might find this thread of interest:

post #23 of 36
thx si,
i was wondering about the references to dalbello. i didn't know they were still making that boot.

thx for the link,

post #24 of 36
Im back, and none too soon it seems.

Well Glad to see you all still hashing out all this. Bob thanks for the thoughts. I just would like to say that in skiing all is true, and not one single thing is the truth. On that note I would like to answer any questions folks have about the SBS system.

Si I am not sure but I think what you did was place the angle thick side outside? if this is so I would have placed the thick side to the inside. This is done to provide you a place to begin your movements from. Measuring Knee mass and placing tha amount inside has no corrolation to how much your foot pronates within the boot. In fact if you are a bit bow legged you might need more help with pronation than a knock knee skier. Just some thoughts. Trying to keep it short and simple.
post #25 of 36
Thread Starter 
Hi Mosh,

Glad to see you back here. I ended up with thick side out on one side and thick side in on the other. I did play with internal cants for a good while actually trying both sides both ways. I was able to adjust the cuff to meet the changes as I had a Head boot with the ability to change cuff angle easily and considerably. However, I could never achieve both a symetric feel to turns and one footed balance. With the side I have now canted on the boot sole I have good solid feel and balance on turns and good balance on 1 ski (on flat terrain). I am not sure I will achieve the same on the other side, even with boot sole canting but it seems worth a try.

I am always open to further suggestions of course.

BTW, I'm actually going to be in Aspen in March for a conference and then some vacation. I will have to stop by to say hi. I know I have your number in email somewhere but if you can, send me a PM with your location and contact again.
post #26 of 36
Hi fellas,

Here's my two cents...First I want to say I had the opportunity to observe Mosh evaluating a customer in the shop in Aspen on his prototype machine a few years ago and I was very intrigued at the concept but somewhat skeptical. I like the idea of finding the neutral balance point and think that it may contribute to the overall balancing package, however; (and I say this with the utmost respect for Mosh) I have been balancing and planing boots for a long time and I have to agree with some other posts on this thread that changing the varus/valgus of the footbed does not directly corrolate to moving the knee in or out, at least not substantially. I agree with Witherall and Everard that canting has to happen under the boot. whether that be with cant strips under bindings or boot soles planed. One note, when that book was written we were still on conventional side cut skis. I would encourage going closer to the center seam on the boot nowadays for a good skier (stronger edge).

Though I am intrigued by Eric's system and would absolutely love to have an assessment by Eric and have footbeds made to test. Eric...when I watched you making footbeds for the gal that day you had quite a large chunk of eva on the footbed and I asked how you planned on getting that inside the boot comfortably? have you solved that issue? Please contact me.

One thing that is often overlooked and a good boot assessor with do before any assessment is to "true" the boot sole. The majority of boots out of the box are not flat. Take a few pair off the shelf and find a perfectly flat smooth surface and rock them back and forth and you may be suprized.

(F.Y.I. the Dalbello boot refered to was recalled because there was a problem with some boots' adjustment bolt loosening while skiing and that was not a good thing. though I thought their system worked awesome with it's infinite adjustment and simple assessment system, it was pretty dummy proof and match my assessment methodology results every time. It did weigh a ton though)
post #27 of 36
I would be happy to get you going some day on a pair of my foot beds. I am sorry I don't remember the day we met but lets see in the past few years I have been refinning the process to make things even more accurate. I have been finding that the amount of angle that I end up using has been decreasing slightly over time. The testing that I do has become cleaner and I am now actualy measuring the lateral angles witin the boots to quantify exactly what the boot boards angle is. I take this number into consideration when doing foot beds or the shims. Most people don't know that the boot boards in boots are very rarely the same from boot to boot and size to size. This is simply just manufacturers inconsistancy. But to my knowlege extremly few boot people measure this angle or even looking at the boot board to make sure they are doing what is needed. So as far as getting the foot bed to work within the boot I have had very few problems even when the angles were larger. Now it is even better.

With respect to the affect to the knee position the internal changes very definatly make changes to knee position. I am extremly exhausted right now and this is prbably not the time to explain but simply put the knee is a hinge joint and can only flex in one plane. the ankle and hip are what cause it to rotate inward or outward. I simply believe that making all decisions based soley on where the knee ends up would be missing out on what casued it to be there in the first place. I cant do much to the pelvic girdle, but we can guide the knee with a foot bed within a boot. I am not saying that knee symptoms should be ignored. I simply think that you need to look at the cause and effect of the whole system not just the parts that are the most visualy distracting symptoms.

The Dalbello thing was a hard blow to the company and I feel for them and this tragic turn of events. I like the idea of having adjustable "Canting" on the boot but we must remember that not all "caning" is created equal. It does different things. When you shave a boot you are changing the foot and tibia all at once. When you place Shims within the boot you are changing the relationship between the foot and tibia at the Sub Taylar joint. you cant do this with shaving or binding adjustments. Boot grinding can not effect the leverage from within the boot.

Oh by the way if anyone wants to know more check out this months issue of Skiing Mag in the new gear section you can read all about the SBS System.

I don't have a problem with anyone that is sceptical it is the people that talk about this product negativly and have never tried it themselves who bun my @$$
post #28 of 36
I have to agree with you, Mosh. As a serious over-pronator, my knees naturally track inward when I flex them with feet flat and pointed straight ahead. Two things can correct that--tilting the ankles outward (inverting the feet and reducing the pronation), and abducting my feet (rotating them so that the toes point slightly outward, like a duck). Since tilting the foot is usually much easier to accomplish in a ski boot than abducting it, it makes sense that it is, at least, a place to start for people with feet like mine.

The Fischer boots that I used last season are a great concept, with their abducted stance. I needed substantially less canting or internal posting with those boots--you even measured me a little OVER-edged on one of them. I felt strong edging response, with no grinding whatsoever.

Unfortunately, Fischer still has a ways to go before they have a truly refined product, so I've returned to a more conventional, but oh-so-nice boot this year--the Nordica Dobermann. They seem to be about half the weight and half the width (on the outside) of the Frankenstein-like Fischers, and they flex so much more smoothly. I will need a little more posting of the footbeds and probably a little canting as well, although they are working surprisingly well with no modifications at all.

Best regards,
Bob Barnes

PS--anyone want a good pair of Fischer boots, size 26.5?
post #29 of 36
I need some advice, who should one go to for boot set up. I have a brand new pair of boots sitting here and am unsure as to whom to go to. I have been to so many and heard different stuff as to leg issues from each. Went to Aspen to see one boot alignment pro only to be told that one leg is bowed fourteen degrees, than the next guy from Telluride states this is not the case. I am not sure who is right and who is wrong. This is very confusing for anyone tiring to figure out proper alignment!
post #30 of 36
If you are in Aspen again I would be happy to take a look. Opinions are free, I can show you what I will do before we do anything. let me know if I can help out.
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 › Boot Alignment: A Working Case