or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New innovation in ski boots - Page 2

post #31 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by FastMan:
Originally posted by sanchez:

As to femur rotating to the outside during a turn. No, we have a wire crossed here. Lets try again. During a carved turn we counter the hip to assist us in developing high edge angles. (See my post in the recent "To Much Counter?" thread for my position on counter) In doing so we counter rotate the hip socket about the ball of the femur (turn the hip to the outside of the turn) THIS ACTION PLACES THE FEMUR (which tends to stay more orientated with the direction the ski points) IN A ROTATED POSITION(turned in the direction of the turn).

Each person has a limited amount that their hip joint will rotate(medial, inside) or counter rotate (lateral,outside) about the ball of the femur. In a traditional boot a degree of the ability of the fumur to rotate (allowing the hip to counter) is consumed by the necessity to turn the foot to match the direction the ski points. This puts us in a hip neutral stance with our femur already partially rotated, which places limits on our ability to counter.

In the Fisher boot the foot does not have to perform this initial turn to match the ski, so the we are able to possess a neutral hip / neutral femur position. This removes the initial depleation of femur range of rotation and allows us to more easily, and more fully, counter the hip. At least this is how I understand the therory. In your post you described that feeling so maybe they are onto something!

Where I recognized a potential for limitations in the Fisher was in the ussage of rotation as a turning force. I may have misused the term steering here for I believe the two use different movements (are you out there Bob Barnes?). In using Rotation as a turning force you rotate the hips and shoulders inside the plane of the skis (toward the inside of the turn)which displaces the tail of the ski. This utilizes an action in the femur converse to its movement during counter rotation of the hip. Because ultimate range of motion in the joint is finite, without having to go through all the explanation, it is clear what is gained on one side of the equation with the Fisher must be lost on the other end. In fact I bet you might have the details of the why all ready figured out on your own. In my opinion lossing a little ability to rotate turn is not a big deal because it's not something used much by upper level skiers anyway.

Hope this helped. :
I haven't been on this for a bit. Yea that has it for me and that's how I see it at least. That whole who's rotating around what can get messy. Gave Galileo and the boys fits while they tried to sort that whole earth and sun thing I'm sure. I still hold that MOST people can get rid of the initial external torsion by aligning the ankle eliminating the torsion at the tibia. I have a bad hip (arthritic) that by times gives pain beyond a limited range of motion. I tend to rotate on that side even when there is no pain (currently) and have to remind myself to change that movement pattern. As the hip goes bad I could see real advantages to this boot set up. However I still think what I really need is to do the work, stretch a ton and get the hip free and working fully again. I can still do that at this point at least. I guess some are talking of no countering with modern skis but I don't actually buy into that. I believe in less countering on modern skis as the carve and deflection if more efficient but I still believe countering is important on a number of fronts.

NOLO I don't know if anyone answered your question (I haven't read all of these fully) but powering the medial side of the shell is for steering (by my definition at least) and somewhat edging. I think more for a steering effort though and that comes from being placed closer to midrange of the rotation of the femur thereby putting you in a stronger position to apply the steering effort. At least I would think that's what they're trying to achvieve and how.

I keep getting a little more interested in trying them.

[ March 05, 2003, 11:37 AM: Message edited by: L7 ]
post #32 of 37

That was great. I'm on the same page now. The femur rotation is the counter move- got it.

However, I don't do that. My skiing style is totally new school, so I don't get any counter (theoretically, and more often than not in practice) in my skiing and racing. Which for me makes the Fischer boot even more attractive (aside from contractual obligations which say I should ski it).

So, yeah there was a wire crossed for me there, thanks for straightening it out. I think it was mostly because I've been working on eliminating that move in my skiing, so I sort of forgot about it. I've got to say that I really like the feeling of inclination you can get (body lean) when you don't counter. Making ski turns with your head not parallel to the slope is somewhat dizzying, but very fun. There is nothing quite like the feeling of the 2 footed carve.

Thanks for taking the time to give me the second explanation.
post #33 of 37
O.k. I've gone and looked for a few instances of DavidM's comments on rotating the feet out in the boots. Here are some quotes I found in the thread, "Balance and Alignment continued", http://www.epicski.com/cgi-bin/ultim...c;f=4;t=001508

All quotes are from DavidM unless noted.

DM: I think it may be a bit more than 3 degrees (that is what we go by). I had a heck of a time convincing the Austrians to drop the ramp angle. By the way they thought it was a good idea to abduct the feet (turn them out at the forefoot). I didn’t agree and still don’t. In a single word it is DUMB! 12/22, 10:22am

RicB: Not wanting to assume anything, how much did they offset the toe box and why do you think it's dumb? I'm not sure what to think about it. The boot skis well for me.
DM: It’s not that much. The saving grace is that the liner allows the ball of the foot to be positioned very close to inside of the shell. This may more than offset the shell alignment. Many boot brands have liners that are as much as 7-8 mm thick between the ball of the foot and the shell. This abducts the foot big time especially when the round toe box pulls the big toe towards the middle of the shell. -12/22,7:18pm

One thing that is a huge problem is that many people stand normally with either one or both feet turned outward (i.e. duck feet). The muscles that rotate the leg being out of balance usually cause this. When skis force their feet into alignment (i.e. straight ahead) this can cause significant stress in the pelvis and lower back (are you out there LisaMarie?). Placing cants under their feet can make their knees look more aligned. But this can cause problems in other parts of the system. There is only so much that any of us can do. I would normally refer a person with such problems to a professional who deals with postural issues. The point here is that we should know our limits. I also recognize that as a Ski Pro there is only so much you can do. If the person were looking for a quick fix from me I would tell them to look elsewhere. 12/30,12:54pm

From Pierre:
David M:

One thing that is a huge problem is that many people stand normally with either one or both feet turned outward (i.e. duck feet). The muscles that rotate the leg being out of balance usually cause this.

You probably all ready know this but the reason we try to end up with the skiers about one degree on the inside edge after alignment is because in a straight run the skis will turn slightly towards each other canceling out the duck feet tendency. -Pierre, 12/30, 3:06pm

dp: And how does one overcome problems of alignment (such as the out-toeing mentioned before) if not with alignment of the equipment in some way.
DM: In the majority of cases appropriate therapies and exercise programs can correct things like out-toeing. One of the reasons I got into all these issues was that my body was pretty much a postural mess from childhood injuries. And over the past 20 years I have had 4 significant injuries all to the left side of my upper body. Toss in some stress and you have a physical disaster.

I have used therapies such as Rolfing, myofascial release, cranial sacral work and more recently, Pilates. Here I am a believer. Pilates can be amazing if you find a good instructor. I have a series of photos taken of my posture over a 6-month period. Even Pilates instructors are amazed at the improvement. I favor this approach. Tinkering with cants and footbeds with few exceptions does nothing to correct the underlying problem. While it can create an aesthetic illusion of improvement such devices usually just shift the problem to a new location in the body.
1/1/03, 8:03am

dp: David- reading your response on the other alignment thread is, perhaps, in part my answer to you! Support underfoot should, I think, be important in cases where the foot is highly flexible, such as with liagmentaous laxity, a very flat arch, etc- any situation where the arch structure is prone to "collapse".
DM: Based on your comments I assume you are a podiatrist or related foot professional. My position on foot function is that it depends on the end result the foot must be able to produce. Are you aware of the research done by the Human Performance Laboratory in Calgary, Alberta that concluded that ‘excess pronation’ (a.k.a. foot ‘collapse’) far from being detrimental as is commonly believed may be a beneficial adaptive process. This is a consideration although I would tend to agree that liagmentaous laxity can be a significant factor affecting foot function (or lack of it) in skiing.

The issue in skiing is that the feet are supported on either their lateral (uphill foot) or medial (downhill foot) margins. The forces will therefore tend to rotate the foot about their respective axes regardless of their being encased in a rigid brace (ski boot). In this situation the points of the tripod like arches of the feet are seeking GRF. Of the 4 possible outcomes only the outside foot has a viable option in terms of encountering a useable source of GRF. In order to access GRF the foot must rotate about its long axis in eversion (i.e into the hill). In other words the disturbing force acting on the foot must cause eversion and the reflex response must be one of inversion facilitated by loading of the 1st MTP (ball of the great toe).

Footbeds and orthotics can support this end result. But they can also impede or prevent it especially if they significantly obstruct the action of the mid tarsal joint. Rear foot control can often be employed with good results. I am far less keen on the use of varus or valgus wedges placed across the balls of the feet. 1/3/03, 8:36am

[ March 05, 2003, 12:36 PM: Message edited by: Tog ]
post #34 of 37
Tog- thanks for the David perspective.

One thing that is different about this boot is that it puts your ankle in a differnet position in the boot, besides just the abduction. I don't know if that would change anything in David's perspective, but it is a bit different than just rotating the boot out.

By the way, I am being as honest as a person whom you don't know over the internet can be when describing my zeal for the boot, but I figure since I'm the only one who has skied it and this thread is getting big that I should put a disclaimer:

I rep for fischer. So, take my comments at whatever value that you ascribe to them.

However, I also just made a big commitment to change my boots this season, going from a Doberman to an Icon XT to a Rossi plug all in the space of one summer, and settling on the Rossi for the forseeable future. So, going to the Fischer boot is a pretty big step for my racing- I'm betting the longshot.

I have also not used the boot in soft snow, so I feel, and have felt for a while, that Nolo's point about needing rotation in certain situations to be very valid. It is something that I have been discussing locally.

This weekend I'll see if I can demo those boots again, and I'll let you all know how they do in an off-piste situation if I get to one (which I have a 95% certainty that I will not, especially since I'm racing SG both days). If you all have any questions that you want me to think about while skiing the boot this weekend, lemme know.

[ March 05, 2003, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: sanchez ]
post #35 of 37
Originally posted by sanchez:
Tog- thanks for the David perspective.

If you all have any questions that you want me to think about while skiing the boot this weekend, lemme know.
I'm now curious about tracking of the inside ski. Since presumably the external rotation of the femur puts you more midrage of available rotatry movement in the hip socket then you have used up some of the range available to track the inside ski evenly. I believe you stated you are skiing quite square to the skis so this may not be as much an issue or noticeable. Just think about it a little and let us/me know if it's an impingement, difference or undetectable or what? Please
post #36 of 37
I can tell you right now about it- its one of the most memorable things about the boot.

You are correct that I ski very square. So, let that guide your analysis of what I say. With the boot, it is easier to track the inside ski. For me with regular boots, tracking the inside ski is a result of pulling the foot back, driving the knee inside, and driving my hip to the outside. It is not a comfortable position.

With the fischer boot, the inside ski tracks more naturally. I don't have to hyperextend my hip in order to straighten out my legs. I'm not a big guy, and I ski with a wide stance. When I have good distance, driving my knee results in a "V" position for my skis. With the abduct, the ski tracks more naturally. Also, my hip is much more relaxed.

Make sense?
post #37 of 37
I don't believe I want to ski by pressuring the side of the boot(referring to power on the inside wall of the boot), but rather by pressing DOWN to the ground through the boot sole and the ski.

Fastman, judging from Sanchez's comment about the difficulty of performing a hockey slide in this boot, I would say that this boot has a fairly specialized purpose and that is to carve.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching