|but a stiff boot nevertheless inihibits the foot's sensory function, causing the body to reflexively adopt a defensive posture. -JohnD
John, I believe what DavidM is saying is rather than a stiff boot inhibiting the foot it is more an overly confined foot that inhibits the balance function. What he's calling the adaptive phase of the foot believing it is on solid ground.
This is good, can we get back to the discussion?
Talk about a waste of bandwidth...How many more pages do we have to sit through where people berate a system they don't even know yet. Sure, the pomposity and arrogance may have needed to be reigned in but surely those goals have been accomplished.
In spite of all the legalistic arguments against the "thesis" or really the presentation of the "thesis" the jury (ie the rest of us or the people who were listening in the first place) want to hear the case. The argument against has been delivered, ad nauseum too, so let's just get on with hearing the rest of it.
There was quite a good discussion going on before this.
|He has a whole bunch of folks in here thinking "aaaah, here's something I never thought of, he must be onto something significant." The truth is that he's not onto anything significant.
The micro focus completely distracts from the goal. -gonzo
He may be onto something very significant. Why don't we hear what he has to say first? Yeah, it could be clearer, but this never started as some thesis presentation. It was a discussion about the topic and as discussions do it strayed around a bit. If we get to the point where we're all about to drink the kool-aid or board the space ship then fine rush in and "protect" us but we're hardly near that point.
The "micro-focus" of the foot or which muscles control balance is distracting? We're not talking about everything in skiing or learning to ski here, just balance and ski boots. Not psychology of learning or learning styles or why it's difficult to learn to ski. The "goal" is just getting the optimal interface of the body to the ski. That's it. All the rest is a different discussion.
The fact is very small changes in equipment can have very big effects. Take the ski. File a few thousandths of an inch of metal off the edge to give a one degree base bevel and you have something very different.
We know "alignment" in ski boots makes a big difference. The discussion has brought up broadening the definition of alignment to include fit - how the foot fits inside the boot and not just the angle of how the leg leaves the boot. We haven't gotten to the end result or "theory" yet. So we'll just have to wait and see exactly what it is and then evaluate it. The supposition was that knowledge of the muscles and the balance mechanism was essential to understanding the theory. Is that a smoke screen or justification for something that really doesn't work? Maybe, but why don't we hear the whole thing and then decide?