New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Knee Bindings - Page 2

post #31 of 91

Beyond: First off, I have no connection to the product other than having bought some and as a happy customer so far. I'm not trying to pull anything off or make any money from any skiing related products. I have said this very clearly in my review. To be sure, I have not been a ski professional for years, and was only a dirt poor instructor back in college. OTOH, those that do stand to profit need to say that right up front when they give thier opinion, so that everyone else can fully understand their frame of reference - not that their opinion is invalid, just that there may be motivation that needs to be understood.

 

Secondly, I should probably take exception that you were directing your generalization that the ACL epidemic is about intermediates skiing with the wrong equipment, towards me. I am not insulted though, because when you see me ski you'll hardly be thinking that. In actual fact you probably have seen me ski already, since I've skied 32 days this season at WV. Furthermore, some of the best skiers I know have fallen victim to the epidemic as well, and are also high level experts - and many are currently ski professionals.

post #32 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

Beyond: First off, I have no connection to the product other than having bought some and as a happy customer so far. 

Sorry if I misunderstood or misstated, based on your assertive enthusiasm. 

Secondly, I should probably take exception that you were directing your generalization that the ACL epidemic is about intermediates skiing with the wrong equipment, towards me. I am not insulted though...

Slow down; wasn't directing anything at you. Go read my post again. Simply stated - in a new paragraph, which signals a new set of thoughts - that intermediates could benefit more from lessons and different equipment than new bindings. Unless you think of yourself as an intermediate, don't see need to be insulted, so glad you're not.

Furthermore, some of the best skiers I know have fallen victim to the epidemic as well, and are also high level experts - and many are currently ski professionals.

Sure, and a number of world cup skiers too. But according to the literature, ACL's blow in a higher proportion of beginning to intermediate skiers because of issues like losing control of a ski while wedging, or getting into the backseat, tensing, and having one ski accelerate suddenly, etc. Again, never said that excellent skiers couldn't blow out their ACL's, or that it meant they were using bad technique, did I? I was talking about intermediates, who are the largest at risk population. Realize how many ways you can tear your ACL and you'll see the point. 

 

post #33 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

Sierra Jim: Interesting points, though they do not jive with the montreal research paper that's out on the web. BTW, I wonder which companies' products you Rep? 

 

FWIW, I was skiing on Lange WCFit 130 boots, Look PX12 Bindings on Dyanstar Omeglass Comp Slalom skis when I tore my ACL last year, so clearly the status quo is NOT working to prevent ACL injuries.

 

(A) I am a retailer not a product rep. It happens that I was the N.A. product manager for LOOK in the period '93-'97. During that time I spent significant quality time with both Carl Ettlinger and David Dodge and more than significant time in the product lab in Nevers France. The upshot of that experience is that I have a pretty fair understanding of the forces that are at play in knee injuries. Twist loads are a fairly small part of that equation. Does the knee binding release as advertised? probably so since the same binding was offered in the past and I saw it tested, and yes, it did release as claimed. The major point here is that while the binding can have an effect on some twist loads, twist loads are minor contrbutors to knee injuries.

 

(B) If you had read the brochure entitled "tips for knee friendly skiing" provided with your look bindings, you would have better information than you currently have. LOOK makes no claims nor any implication that they offer protection for your knees. In fact your injury like most is probably not binding related at all. The "phantom foot syndrome" is largely related to boots with stiff high backs, agressive forward lean, and skis with stiff tails and aggressive sidecuts (exactly like your setup)

 

 

SJ

 

 


Edited by SierraJim - Fri, 06 Feb 09 03:13:44 GMT

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

Reply
post #34 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post 

Haven't taken anything apart, but the above 14 toes I have (several Look and Tyrolia 15's, one Tyrolia 17) look very similar to the 12-14's, just beefier and all metal. No evidence of a different design or missing bit. Do they just block the motion internally?  

In the case of the 614, yes, (actually selectable) in the case of the other ones, no, they don't function similarly at all.  The Look/Rossi metal toe pivots, it does not roll or pitch.  The plastic toes are free to pitch, roll, and pivot via a spherical bearing surface.  Turn them down low enough (find some of your kids 10's or 12's) and you can pull the toe wings out and rotate them freely.

 

To me, it is a largely irrelevant difference.  I ski in all manner of bindings, and I don't remember the last time I had a vertical toe release from any of them.  Used to happen now and again with Markers 10 years ago.

[quote]

But IMO a lot of this isn't about bindings, it's about too many intermediates using skis and boots that allow higher forces than their technique can handle. Herd them all into ski school, in flexier boots and straighter skis, and you'll have a far bigger drop in ACL tears than any binding redesign.

[/quote]

 

I'll just respond with a question:  Which WC athletes on the US team haven't had knee surgery? Yes, education about risk factors and technique is important and likely to have an impact (this has been done, and has been described in the literature), but it doesn't solve the root cause.  The root cause is that current ski bindings do not release when forces input through the ski/binding/boot system become large enough to tear ACLs.  Whether or not the root cause is actionable is up to clever mechanical designers, the laws of physics, and the human body.  I'm reserving any negative judgment until I have good reason for it.

 

Jim's claims are suspect.  Specifically the claim that the "vast majority" of knee injuries don't involve "twist" in any vector.  If that were true, changing ski shapes would certainly not have had the effect on knee injuries they have had.  Reality is that additional shape has made skis more dangerous for knees, and this is in part because shaped skis are more capable of applying certain forces (call them what you want) through the boot that do not result in a large force at the toe of the binding, yet result in damaging loads on ligaments.  The specific remedies and feasibility of them here is probably (like ABS, shudder that I brought that up) beyond layman's discourse.

post #35 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
Quote:

 

Jim's claims are suspect.  Specifically the claim that the "vast majority" of knee injuries don't involve "twist" in any vector.  If that were true, changing ski shapes would certainly not have had the effect on knee injuries they have had.  Reality is that additional shape has made skis more dangerous for knees, and this is in part because shaped skis are more capable of applying certain forces (call them what you want) through the boot that do not result in a large force at the toe of the binding, yet result in damaging loads on ligaments.  The specific remedies and feasibility of them here is probably (like ABS, shudder that I brought that up) beyond layman's discourse.

 

There is just enough correct information in this paragraph to be extremely dangerous. The shaped ski has an effect but that effect is not to impart a dangerous twist load. The effect is that the ski accelerates in a linear plane to the direction of travel. The fwd lean of the boot and the stiff high back pushes the knee forward and opens the knee joint. When the skier is "in the backseat" trying to recover, and the boot has opened the knee joint, the knee ligaments are vulnerable. When the ski (with the boot still attached) accelerates due to the tail pressure the knee is injured due to a linear shear force. The injury usually occurs before the resultant fall (which might contain a twist load BTW)

 

SJ


Edited by SierraJim - Fri, 06 Feb 09 03:34:52 GMT

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

Reply
post #36 of 91

Beyond: As I said I am not insulted, and I am glad I clarified my relationship as merely a happy customer hoping to avoid re-injury. To your point on intermendiates, I didn't actually realize that the predominance of these injuries affects that group as I see so many strong skiers around me falling victim (and I don't happen to ski with intermediates very often - or at least for very long).

 

SierraJim: I think we're going to agree to disagree about how to fix this epidemic. You are now blaming everything other than bindings. Yes, of course everything you mention contributes as you highlighted, but nothing other than the bindings can resolve the stresses by its role in the SYSTEM of equipment of safely "releasing" (Lange did unsuccessfully try to introduce the RRS a few years back, as a rear bootback release, but it quickly fizzled out no doubt because no one wanted to manage the response of multiple release devices to an input). IMO, it is up to the binding manufacturers to resolve the ACL epidemic. Heck, they are typically owned by the same folks (holding companies) making the successful stiff tailed shaped skis and stiff high backed forward leaning boots. In any case, I don't think we're going to go back to short boots and straight skis so this argument with diversionary blame placing is moot. Speaking of straight skis the early ones did not release at all, and many a leg was broken before the advent of the "safety binding" which greatly reduced injury by releasing the skier. Back then boots were no higher than high top sneakers, and not much stiffer either, and lateral toe release was just fine to protect skiers. Today, a half century later, the safety binding just needs to evolve to afford greater protection to the skiers legs AND knees, in response to the evolution of the rest of the SYSTEM.

post #37 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

 

 

SierraJim: I think we're going to agree to disagree about how to fix this epidemic. You are now blaming everything other than bindings.

 

Incorrect.........bindings are better than they have ever been but they cannot address the forces that cause the majority of knee injuries.

 

Yes, of course everything you mention contributes as you highlighted, but nothing other than the bindings can resolve the stresses by its role in the SYSTEM of equipment of safely "releasing"

 

Incorrect...see below.

 

(Lange did unsuccessfully try to introduce the RRS a few years back, as a rear bootback release, but it quickly fizzled out no doubt because no one wanted to manage the response of multiple release devices to an input).


Incorrect....The RRS boot failed due to the incompetence of the ski shops in delivering the message. (I was present during the R&D of that product....it worked)

 

IMO, it is up to the binding manufacturers to resolve the ACL epidemic.

 

Correct....that is your opinion.

 

Heck, they are typically owned by the same folks (holding companies) making the successful stiff tailed shaped skis and stiff high backed forward leaning boots. In any case, I don't think we're going to go back to short boots and straight skis so this argument with diversionary blame placing is moot.

 

Incorrect........during the time of short boots and long straight skis, knee injuries were extremely rare and bone injuries were common as dirt. When ski and boot technology changed, the injury incidence changed. You are seeking to blame binding manufacturers for not addressing a problem they had no culpability in creating and cannot correct b/c current technology cannot address it.

 

Speaking of straight skis the early ones did not release at all, and many a leg was broken before the advent of the "safety binding" which greatly reduced injury by releasing the skier. Back then boots were no higher than high top sneakers, and not much stiffer either, and lateral toe release was just fine to protect skiers. 

 

See above

 

Today, a half century later, the safety binding just needs to evolve to afford greater protection to the skiers legs AND knees, in response to the evolution of the rest of the SYSTEM.


This is going to be hard for you to believe but you are not the first one to figure this out. However, when you design the first binding that can protect the knee relevant to the loads that cause the majority of knee injuries, you will not be the first to try but you will be the first to succeed............please keep us posted.

 

You are correct about one thing.........you have an opinion.

 

SJ

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

Reply
post #38 of 91

Deleted per court order.


Edited by rick howell - 4/2/2009 at 09:50 pm
post #39 of 91

Off-topic:  The post above was exported to a wiki article The Kneebinding Scoop.  While the information is valuable and very interesting, I'm unsure of keeping this as a wiki because it is the unique contribution of one member, while wikis are intended to be collaborative.  As such, any modification of this post in a wiki is unfair to the original poster, who should be attributed as one source in any wiki.  Wiki articles that are the contribution of one member should be locked from any further modification, and should only be posted as articles with the consent of the original poster.

 

We do not have guidelines in place yet, but I think we will need to adopt this approach soon.  Thanks for letting me go off-topic a bit.  Please do not reply here, but use the post started in the Community forum to reply to my points. Wiki Guideline considerations.

post #40 of 91

SierraJim: As I said before, I think we can agree to disagree here! In the future, please do not copy and paste my words. I write them cogently and efficiently, and do not appreciate others chopping up my thoughts, to juxtapose them and suit their puropose. If you have a problem with what I say, then just say it in your own words - that is if you can!

 

Furthermore, SierraJim has now confirmed for everyone how eminently unqualified he is to be spouting opinions on this product, as it is now so painfully obvious that he has clear financial ties to competitors of this product - through the products that he reps or is somehow involved with. I alluded to these ties earlier as something that should be made clear uo front to readers so that they may understand a writer's frame of reference - and now down the road the fact that SierraJim's has these ties is patently clear to everyone else. OTOH, I am simply a Kneebinding customer and I have personally used this product for 19 ski days and over a half million vertical feet, and as such actually have an opinion on this product that is useful to others. To be sure, I'm going to go out right now to ski my 20th day on Kneebindings, and my 34th day this season since ACL reconstruction last season!

 

Rick Howell: We have never actually spoken before, but thank you very much for jumping in to set the record straight!

post #41 of 91

......Thanks for the thorough reply Rick, and thanks for addressing the issues I had with the binding. The pre-release only happened once so I agree that it may not have been a major issue with the binding itself, but simply an adjustment issue. Prior to locking in the bindings I was very careful about snow removal as I knew I was "testing" and I also knew I was going to put the binding through a much more challenging phase of testing that day. The forward pressure could have been the culprit.

 

At the manufacturer they seemed to be aware of the AFD issue but given the amount of attention to design and at that price, there is no forgiving such a major pre-market oversight. Same with the plastic heel adjustment screw. These issues, as you stated need to be addressed. Might I also recommend that they develop alternate super stiff plates as the ski interface, with wider dimensions and less ramp angle to accommodate the newer wider ski dimensions underfoot. This would give the consumer another option for achieving greater leverage over the wider skis like the Goatamas, etc...., while also addressing the flatter ramps preferred by the types of skiers skiing these skis. 

 

I actually integrated a small plexi plate under the toe to reduce the ramp on my Mantras (it was checked by the manufacturer for compatability and given the okay). It worked like a charm.

 

Thanks again.

post #42 of 91

Interesting, SierraJim seems to me to have clearly indicated that he was a retailer and is NOT a rep for any products at this time.  He did say that in the past he had a relationship with Look but now simply worked on the retail side of the business.  As a retailer he would naturally want to have the best information and the best product for his customers.

 

In my opinion, SierraJim regularily provides insightful, unbiased, and accurate product information

post #43 of 91

SJ and Chris both offer interesting insight on this topic. Many of us want to learn as much as possible about this product.....let it go, and let's keep on topic. Thanks.....

post #44 of 91

Nice post Rick...having torn my ACL in October '08, I am interested in trying to figure out what caused my injury (of the 3 causes you give).  Not sure if it was Phantom Foot or BIAD.  Here are the facts as best as I can remember them:

    Steeper section of A-Basin WROD (groomed intermediate run with mostly man made snow)

    Using my dull edged rock skis (185 cm Solomon Scream Hot 10 P 110-75-100) w/ integerated 912 ti bindings set at 8 (I'm 6' 3'' 185 lbs).  Solomon X-Wave 8 free 90 flex boots size 30.5

    Going at a medium speed, started a right turn and my feet went out from under me (edges didn't hold)

    Some attempt to get up without success

    Slid for a while on my right side with some pressure on the tails of my skis, but without feeling any twisting or that my bindings should have released

    Felt pop in my right knee while still sliding (well after my attempt to get up)

 

Thanks,

Matt

     

post #45 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

SierraJim: As I said before, I think we can agree to disagree here! In the future, please do not copy and paste my words. I write them cogently and efficiently, and do not appreciate others chopping up my thoughts, to juxtapose them and suit their puropose. If you have a problem with what I say, then just say it in your own words - that is if you can!

 

Furthermore, SierraJim has now confirmed for everyone how eminently unqualified he is to be spouting opinions on this product, as it is now so painfully obvious that he has clear financial ties to competitors of this product - through the products that he reps or is somehow involved with. I alluded to these ties earlier as something that should be made clear uo front to readers so that they may understand a writer's frame of reference - and now down the road the fact that SierraJim's has these ties is patently clear to everyone else. OTOH, I am simply a Kneebinding customer and I have personally used this product for 19 ski days and over a half million vertical feet, and as such actually have an opinion on this product that is useful to others. To be sure, I'm going to go out right now to ski my 20th day on Kneebindings, and my 34th day this season since ACL reconstruction last season!

 

Rick Howell: We have never actually spoken before, but thank you very much for jumping in to set the record straight!

Lot of attitude for someone with 21 posts. Suspect we'll cut and paste as we think appropriate; over the years most of us have found it's a lot more efficient in a long thread to quote a particular sentence or para, and the reader has your words right there, than expect the reader to scroll back to find your deathless comments and then back to the rejoiners.

 

Also amusing you begin your comment to SJ with "I think we can agree to disagree here," but then don't think you need to follow your own advice, getting all smug and preachy about a respected member of this community who has given this forum years of thoughtful, unusually non-biased advice. So newsflash: Nothing you allege is "patently clear," whether about your new favorite binding or your statements that Jim is "unqualified," "spouting" opinions, is "somehow" a rep, and so on. Your initial stuff here was interesting, but now you're turning into another boring newbie full of himself. 

post #46 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree30 View Post

Nice post Rick...having torn my ACL in October '08, I am interested in trying to figure out what caused my injury (of the 3 causes you give).  Not sure if it was Phantom Foot or BIAD.  Here are the facts as best as I can remember them:

    Steeper section of A-Basin WROD (groomed intermediate run with mostly man made snow)

    Using my dull edged rock skis (185 cm Solomon Scream Hot 10 P 110-75-100) w/ integerated 912 ti bindings set at 8 (I'm 6' 3'' 185 lbs).  Solomon X-Wave 8 free 90 flex boots size 30.5

    Going at a medium speed, started a right turn and my feet went out from under me (edges didn't hold)

    Some attempt to get up without success

    Slid for a while on my right side with some pressure on the tails of my skis, but without feeling any twisting or that my bindings should have released

    Felt pop in my right knee while still sliding (well after my attempt to get up)

 

Thanks,

Matt

 

Should probably have added that the MRI showed a 60% tear of MCL and a slight meniscus tear that the surgeon thought would need a 5-10% trim, but ended up being a 20-25% trim to the (outside?) portion that doesn't get much blood flow.  Realize that although I didn't feel a lot of twisting, that these additional injuries could point a differerent direction. 

     


 

post #47 of 91

I agree with much of what SierraJim said.  For those that are interested, watch Jan Hudec's DH run at the World Champ's yesterday.  Carefully watch his left knee over the second bump before he fell.  He was behind his feet and his COM was not balanced over his BOS - in other words, secondary restraints to stabilize the knee were not activated and his ACL was left relatively unprotected to the huge forces that were about to come.  There is no doubt that he tore his ACL in that moment.  Shades of Schlopy and many other athletes that have had a similar injury mechanism.

 

Speed + ski (lever) + boot (lever) + technique + impaired balance/reaction... can cause ACL injury indepedent of the capacity of the binding.  In the cases of Hudec and Schlopy, the 'inward twisting' component of the injury mechanism - from the rut/bump picking up and redirecting the ski very rapidly - probably overwhelms the capacity of any mechanical binding to react in enough time to protect the knee.

 

Having said the above, kudos to Rick for blood, sweat, tears, and effort in regard to developing his binding which does mitigate the impact of several of the ACL injury mechanisms.  I hope that someone is collecting data to validate effectiveness, not just efficacy.

 

I would add that the BIAD mechanism is often augmented by quads activation which further increases the anterior drawer effect, and makes it even more difficult to design a binding around this type of injury.

 

Lastly, IMO there's some woefully ignorant crap on this thread re. biomechanics, physics, injury mechanisms, and equipment.

 


Edited by jdistefa - 2/8/2009 at 04:50 pm


Edited by jdistefa - 2/8/2009 at 04:51 pm


Edited by jdistefa - 2/8/2009 at 04:55 pm


Edited by jdistefa - 2/8/2009 at 05:10 pm


Edited by jdistefa - 2/8/2009 at 05:13 pm
post #48 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree30 View Post

    Going at a medium speed, started a right turn and my feet went out from under me (edges didn't hold)

    Some attempt to get up without success

    Slid for a while on my right side with some pressure on the tails of my skis, but without feeling any twisting or that my bindings should have released

    Felt pop in my right knee while still sliding (well after my attempt to get up)

 

Thanks,

Matt

     

BIAD +/- quads activation
 

post #49 of 91

Very Interesting Stuff 

 

Sierra Jim gives very good advice and I trust his judgement on market items, and he seems like a good man! Jim, would you ever sell this Knee Binding if it all that it's supposed to be?

 

 I'm wondering if anyone has direct first hand experience with this binding?  If these actually decrease the chances of knee injury by (say for example) 50%, and they provide great performance and ease of use, then I would probably pay some extra amount for that (maybe $200 more than normal).

 

 

post #50 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaportrail View Post

Very Interesting Stuff 

 

Sierra Jim gives very good advice and I trust his judgement on market items, and he seems like a good man! Jim, would you ever sell this Knee Binding if it all that it's supposed to be?

 

 I'm wondering if anyone has direct first hand experience with this binding?  If these actually decrease the chances of knee injury by (say for example) 50%, and they provide great performance and ease of use, then I would probably pay some extra amount for that (maybe $200 more than normal).

 

 

 

If it were all that it is claimed to be?.....sure. Even if it were part of what it is claimed to be, I would still sell it. However, the crux of the problem for a retailer is as follows.

 

The skiing consumer who has been injured for the most part feels like (stuff happens...on to rehab) but others feel that they have been wronged. The latter may feel that their equipment failed and the injury is the fault of the equipment supplier. Hence, they wish to assign blame and secure compensation through litigation.

 

The ski industry has largely gotten past this through education (ie; bindings cannot protect you from injury....etc) and also via waivering the risks (ie; "skiing is dangerous, you may get hurt....yadda yadda yadda....sign here")

 

So.......now we have a product that may actually make the claim of reducing the risk of encountering a specific injury in certain circumstances but not others. Stated that way.........you're fairly safe......but the consumer probably won't buy in because the claim is too vague (as it has to be)

 

OTH..........If the seller (me) makes the statement above, the consumer may choose to hear it differently and thus if they are injured, may feel they were misled or the product failed. Hence litigation looms.

 

The deposition would go something like this...................


"Mr Sierra Jim; did you on Jan 10th 2009 sell Mr. Smith the product in question and did you make a statement to Mr. Smith that in any way implied that the product in question would protect him from knee injury?...............Yes or No"

 

SJ

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

Reply
post #51 of 91

Update on my Kneebinding Experience

 

21 ski days on Kneebindings (of my 35 total ski days so far this season), and well over 1/2 million vertical feet, by an expert skier in all conditions and on all terrain. Still NO pre-releases, NO knee injuries, NO bone breaks, just GREAT skiing!

post #52 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

Update on my Kneebinding Experience

 

21 ski days on Kneebindings (of my 35 total ski days so far this season), and well over 1/2 million vertical feet, by an expert skier in all conditions and on all terrain. Still NO pre-releases, NO knee injuries, NO bone breaks, just GREAT skiing!

 

Nice to hear. Statistically.......................totally irrelevant.

 

SJ

Bringing World Cup caliber ski equipment and service to all skiers - from pro ski racers to everyday all mountain skiers and into the...

Reply
post #53 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRISfromRI View Post

Update on my Kneebinding Experience

 

21 ski days on Kneebindings (of my 35 total ski days so far this season), and well over 1/2 million vertical feet, by an expert skier in all conditions and on all terrain. Still NO pre-releases, NO knee injuries, NO bone breaks, just GREAT skiing!

 

Nice to hear. Statistically.......................totally irrelevant.

 

SJ


 

Yup, like pissing in the ocean.

post #54 of 91

Deleted per court order.


Edited by rick howell - 4/2/2009 at 09:53 pm
post #55 of 91

It seems that the big question is whther most or many skiing ACL injuries result from - or coincide with - a torsional force that translates down through the binding. If the answer is yes and the Knee binding deal with this force then it will help a number of people. If not, then it won't.

 

A few things occur to me:

First:  ACL injuries are common in a number of sports where you don't have a huge lever attached to your foot. The leg injury unique to skiing - and the one that modern bindings are designed to reduce are lower leg fractues. If you can tear an ACL playing basketball, soccer etc, then how would a binding mitigate this significantly?

Second: We why not focus more injury reduction strategies at the site of injury. There are knee supports that can provide some additonal protection to the ACL. If you are concerned about such injuries then wear one.

Third: If developing a binding along the lines of a knee binding was the answer, and it was mostly an engineering problem, then what was stopping major companies from developing a similar design? Apathy? This seems unlikely. Consider further the large financial incentives that national ski teams and sponsors of elite alpine skiiers have to develop such a binding. It would save the careers of numerous skiers, save on expensive medical treatments, etc.

Fourth: from personal expereince when I have tweeked my knee skiing, I have to agree with SJ's assement that in that very vulnerable position where your hips drop below your knees, it takes a very small force to pull or tear the ACL. Significantly less than would trigger a release. If you are looking for a technology to reduce that kind of injury it would need to be integrated into the boot itself closer to where those forces occur.

post #56 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by aschick View Post

 

First:  ACL injuries are common in a number of sports where you don't have a huge lever attached to your foot. The leg injury unique to skiing - and the one that modern bindings are designed to reduce are lower leg fractues. Good point, however from what I understand, slow mo's of basketball injuries ususually show the player has his/her hips behind CM, often lands on one leg, and often has an awkward landing involving a turning motion. So it may be more like skiing than it seems. 

Second: We why not focus more injury reduction strategies at the site of injury. There are knee supports that can provide some additonal protection to the ACL. If you are concerned about such injuries then wear one. Again, from what I understand and what orthopedists have told me, braces help stabilize an already "loose" or previously injured knee, appear to significantly reduce re-injury. But they do not apparently fit closely enough or "react" quickly enough - it might take a full cast, literally, which could, ah detract from skiing movements - to prevent the initial tear. As you mention below, ACL does not necessarily involve a prolonged movement, more like a microsecond of overload on an already taut/stressed ligament. 

Third: If developing a binding along the lines of a knee binding was the answer, and it was mostly an engineering problem, then what was stopping major companies from developing a similar design? Apathy? Economics and psychology, I'd assume. This is not a national crisis akin to terrorism or bank failures, where we might call for concerted federal/private action. Statistically, most skiers do not ever blow out their ACL's; ACL is not even the most common skiing knee injury, just the most serious. So most skiers do not anticipate they will have a ACL rupture ("won't happen to me, I'm careful,") and therefore most skiers would not pay as much for a binding as for a ski to prevent something they do not fear.

Fourth: from personal expereince when I have tweeked my knee skiing, I have to agree with SJ's assement that in that very vulnerable position where your hips drop below your knees, it takes a very small force to pull or tear the ACL. Significantly less than would trigger a release. If you are looking for a technology to reduce that kind of injury it would need to be integrated into the boot itself closer to where those forces occur. Yep. Or a mechanism - I've seen something like this pictured on one of the knee sites - that runs from knee to ski, which would make us look like Ironman (and maybe ski like him).

 

OTOH, getting back to my intermediate comment earlier in this thread, it seems to me that ALL skiers CAN get into a position that threatens the ACL, but experts are less likely because they spend less time in the backseat, jump better, and are more experienced about falling.

 

On one of the knee sites there's a great/sickening video of an intermediate female doing a little mini-jump (looks to be in chalky ridgeline terrain beyond her ability), sitting /falling backwards onto her skis (thus loading and locking her ACL), struggling to get up again while still moving foward across the fall line (thus putting more stress on it), and all of a sudden her downhill ski deviates suddenly (looks like it gets pushed by some light chop), and she cries out, starts sliding downhill in a heap. (Her doofus male companion is taking it all very light-heartedly, laughing while he asks if she's all right. She is not.) 

 

IMO her skill set, or lack of it, plus someone's bad judgement, caused that blow out, not her lousy binding. My .02

 

post #57 of 91

Deleted per court order.


Edited by rick howell - 4/2/2009 at 09:54 pm
post #58 of 91

Deleted per court order.


Edited by rick howell - 4/2/2009 at 09:54 pm
post #59 of 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by rick howell View Post

An anology to the introduction of a technology like this comes from my past experience introducing the first hands-off clipless bicycle pedal system:  most retailers shunned it because they already had an inventory of pedals with toe straps and shoes that interfaced ordinary clips.  But early adapter retailers tried it and their customers loved them.

Sounds like KneeBinding needs a Greg Lemond!

post #60 of 91

Deleted per court order.


Edited by rick howell - 4/2/2009 at 09:55 pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion