or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Demystifying the Alignment Process
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Demystifying the Alignment Process

post #1 of 35
Thread Starter 
I wonder if it is possible to clarify for people what is, or should be, involved in the alignment process. To start things off I offer this list of steps but will leave it to the experts to elaborate, add, subtract, re-order, define iterative processes, etc. I offer a few comments and questions to initiate discussion not as an expression of personal opinion.

1) Boot model selection. Obviously last, volume, and other characteristics must be right for the given individual. However, other features such as cuff lean, rotary vs. lateral construction, etc. are also improtant factors that need to be considered).

2) Boot Fitting and adjusment. Obviously length, width, volume, and many other factors must be correct. A good example of something I've heard from a few boot fitters, and perhaps worth discussing, is the frequent need to blow out the medial cuff to permit adequate ankle mobility for turn initiation. Another controversial issue is how to assess the need for and properly prescribe internal heel (or toe?)lifts.

3) Foot Beds. What are the criterea that are important in creating a comfortable and effective base of support for the foot? What are the pros and cons of rigid vs. compliant foot beds? Should foot beds be molded based on weighted, partially weighted, or unweighted casting/impresssion.

4) Ramp Angle. How do you assess the correct ramp angle (sum of angles from boot, binding, and lifters). How do you adjust ramp angle both inside and outside of the boot?

5) Binding Mounting Position. How important is this? Should we trust manufacturer's suggested mounting points. Can an optimal position be assesses in any way besides empirical testing.

6) Canting. At what point is it reasonable to consider lateral canting. Advantages of under-binding cants vs. boot sole canting.

Finally, how does a skier do this with confidence and cost effectiveness? How much can they learn to do for themselves? What is the value of getting alignment tuned in optimally. Is it worth performing latter steps when previous steps may not be properly satisfied? (Note that this is a very common situation - so let's be somewhat pragmatic here).
post #2 of 35
Si these are all excellent points. The problem is where does one start.

It is my position that if one sets off on the wrong foot (pun intended) it is likely what follows will compound the first error. Over time I intend to try and address all these issues on epicski in a comprehensive and logical manner. For now I say the place to start is with an assessment of the human system. I am in the process of trying to create a reasonable criterion to assess human function against. The issues you raise can not be adequately addressed in a few sentences.
post #3 of 35
Thread Starter 
DM, While I appreciate your point and agree to some extent it is unfotunately not very pragmatic or practical for skiers who want to do something in this repsect. I surely am willing to shove everything down and include a "skier functional assessment" as a first step but even here I would like to see a practical approach described. Thanks.
post #4 of 35
Si, I wish I could tell you how to make everything work in 5 easy steps. But after having worked with skiers up to the World Cup level it has been my consistent experience that if one has significant functional deficits in their body and they do not address them they severely limit their potential as skiers. Worse, some of the problems in skier's bodies make skiing inherently dangerous in terms of increasing their risk of injury.

If there is a place to start after the body it is with forward lean. Excessive forward is crippling the majority of skiers.
post #5 of 35
Thread Starter 
David,

I understand your point of view but can't say I'm in close agreement. I personally know at least one person who is working with current World Cup racers (with success!) who doesn't believe it's as mysterious and/or complicated as you believe. I also know a few alignment "experts" (I know this is a tough one to define - I hope this thread can help in that respect) who feel the same way. I'm certainly willing to listen to both sides but look forward to responses from those who successfully work with alignment on a regular basis.

I'm not looking for any specific number of EASY steps but I am asking for a delineation of the process. If there is a step or multiple steps that require a great "eye," experience, and/or skill then so be it. At least let's get a general description of what they are. On the other hand, from my personal experiences, I expect there are those who can break down each step into relatively simple assessment procedures. Unfortunately, I am afraid that most of those people are in the busiest part of their season with little time to post.

Best, Si

[ December 31, 2002, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Si ]
post #6 of 35
Quote:
Originally posted by Si:

Finally, how does a skier do this with confidence and cost effectiveness? How much can they learn to do for themselves? What is the value of getting alignment tuned in optimally. Is it worth performing latter steps when previous steps may not be properly satisfied? (Note that this is a very common situation - so let's be somewhat pragmatic here).
They can learn from a variety of sources. (Books):
"The Atheltic Skier" (Witherell/Evrard) This book details the alignment cycle and has a table that identifies visually obvious compensation movements for over and under edged skiers that is a valuable movement analysis accessory.
"Anyone can be an expert skier" (Harb)

An informed comsumer may be more likely to become a satified one.

Ask around, who in there area has "been there, done that".
What shops have a reputaion among pros and/or racers for quality alignment set up?

The value of optimal alignment may vary at different levels. Learning-wise it means being able to let go of compensating movement habits and more easilly learn efficient movements (instead of ones based on compensation for alignment issues). Performance-wise translates into improved balance, increased agility, and less fatigue and joint stress.

As for latter steps when previous steps may not be properly satisfied? You might wind up with less than optimal cuff adj or canting if footbed is less that optimised. It's like building a house on a crooked foundation, everything is askew, nothing square. This is the importance of the "Alignment Cycle" detailed in "The Atheltic Skier".

I had cants years ago, before there were footbeds as we know them today or even cuff adjustments, and used a couple degrees more cant than I do today (and didn't ski as well)

I learned most of what I have so far from books, others, experience, and mostly experimenting with my own setup and then on to working with a shop and skiers through the entire process.

I've learned that, contrary to some schools of thought, you can not solve all alignment issues inside a ski boot whose shell is designed with angles that are a mis-match for a given skier's anatomy. I strongly recommend that people stay away from those who think they can, and that canting is never necessary (that belief demonstrates limited understanding). Trying to do too much by manipulating the foot inside the boot can be just as bad as not doing enough. A lot of skiers need to have the "cycle" carried through to the canting process, with fine tuning on snow. The fact is we move (and line up differently) in the dynamic movement environment out on the slopes than we do standing still in a ski shop. I refer to the shop process as getting in the right zip code, on slope is where you find the person's street address, where their alignment feels at "home".

I have found too many people willing to accept "good enough" and stop far short of pursuing optimal alignment. There is a one page chapter in "The Atheltic Skier" titled "The 80/20 Rule of Alignment" that basically suggests that the first 80% of what you adjust will gain you 20% in performance (nothing to sneeze at), but the last 20% you "dial in" will gain you 80% in performance. My personal experience bears this out. I've found that the last 1/4 degree of cant (.010") is critical to my being able to fully enjoy skiing the way I want to (but I live on hard snow, fluff floaters may not be as concerned).

Not sure if this advice meets your pragmatic criteria.
The net is: It is worth doing, and it is worth more done right.
:

[ December 31, 2002, 10:27 AM: Message edited by: Arcmeister ]
post #7 of 35
An Approach –

Read and learn all you can about different boots. The buyer needs to be educated first. Those that demo the boots in ski mag’s really try and be fair but make sure you understand their profile weight, type of skiing etc. and then honestly understand yours.

Go to only a shop you have easy access to that has a reputable alignment person. How will you know who is respected, ask around or post on this forum with your location and I am sure someone will have a recommendation! This will rule out purchasing boots on vacation. I know the destination shops will hate this but do you really want to mail your boots back and forth when you need that fine tuning you may need.

Talk to the specialist about foot beds. I know some on the forum have a difference of opinion on this but this is mine and all in all it will satisfy the average skier. Be armed with a few good questions such as are the foot beds flexible or rigid? You want a semi flexible foot bed. Are they made while you stand on a semi soft pad or sitting with no weight or standing on a hard surface? You want a semi soft pad while you are molding the foot bed shape in a skier’s stance. They also should check knee alignment while they are making the foot bed. Most foot beds have a cork type heel and can be filed/ground and adjusted a little to align the foot bed with the knee.

Ask if the specialist thinks you would have any particular problem in obtaining a proper alignment. The first thing they should do is sit you down, pull off your shoes and socks, stand you up in a skier’s stance, roll up your pants (if you have pants), and look at your legs/knees/hips, and feet. Run away if they do not do something along this order!

If they want to fit the boot before the bed RUN!

Once the foot bed is made and you have an idea of the type of skier you are we can start looking at boots. (Remember these are your foot beds to take to any shop to try on boots so don’t be intimidated. Go to other shops that have different boots!) Personally a neutral cuff is what I like. They should pull out the liner, put your foot beds in the boot, put you in the boot in a skiers stance, close the boot with you shins touching the front of the boot, and measure the space between your Achilles and the rear of the boot. That gap for an advanced skier needs to be no more than a finger plus a little and for the average skier a finger or and a half to maybe a little more. No science they will just stick their fingers (or dowel rods)in and use a flashlight. Remember boots are not necessarily manufactured in all sizes but the liners are. Thicker liner for smaller foot in a larger shell and after awhile the liner may break down and become sloppy if you choose the wrong boot. This is a good time to see if the boot cuff has about the same gap all around the leg. It does not have to be exact but it must be close enough the technician can realign the cuff easily so the boot meets the leg instead of the boot forcing the leg over where the boot is; it kind of hurts after awhile if you bend the leg where it does not want to be. If all looks good now we can install the liners, the foot beds, and you. Tighten the boot just tight enough the buckles click shut and would not open while skiing but do not BANG shut. That is TOO TIGHT. These are boots not clamps and you must allow the muscles and tendons to move around and flex. Speaking of moving around wear the boots for 30-40 minutes or more but don’t just walk around in them. Move like your skiing, flex, move up down and lateral, sit down and sense what your feet feel like hanging, now stand in them and feel your feet. Drop a dime on the floor and stand on it. Can you feel the coin? Your boot needs to have a feel through the sole to feed back to you! Are they cutting off the feel to the sole of the foot?

Some things I look for in a boot are plenty of buckle adjustment, a power strap that is nice and wide and affixed well to the boot, cant adjustment in the cuff but I personally would forget the walk/ski mode myself. Is the boot the correct stiffness for you? If you are not a racer you probably do not want a race boot. If you are pretty strong you will want a boot just below a race boot. If you are slight of build you may want to look at a junior race boot as opposed to an adult boot. Make sure the boot liner has a gel around the side area of the ankle so the boot can flow in the hollow spots. If you are a weekend skier comfort is fine but you do not have to give up a good fit so you may want a little softer boot but DO NOT give up the buckle adjustments that are not in the lower end boots. Stay in boots that have fine buckle adjustments on all the buckles. I would for now stay away from the new cable closer boots and the self-molding plug into your cigarette lighter boots. The jury is still out on these boots and you can see what happen to the heater in the liner boots. Vail is using the cable boot in their beginner program so we will see. The boots that are molded in the shop can be great but will become at least 30% stiffer after molding and can be very hard to re sale. Yep they can be re molded but remeber why they created fast food and that is who you are attempting to sell your boots to!

Note I never mentioned skis and canting of the ski. I believe IF you set up the foot bed and boot correctly only a very few will ever need a cant even though the machine may say you do. I prefer not to cant skis if it can be avoided and most of the time it can.

I hope the above is somewhat simple. If you know just enough about what you want and what you are doing you will scare those that don’t. All you need to do is pay attention, ask a few questions, and when they are looking for an out or as one might say starting to BS you simply leave! Remember this is only my approach but it is an experienced approach. There are other approaches that are probably just as correct as mine and will work also. Once you become knowledgeable you will form your own approach. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]
post #8 of 35
My wife and I have gone through the alignment process a couple of times. I think it is fairly easy to determine if one is out of alignemnt and by how much. Certainly well fittng boots and custom insoles are the place to begin for all skiers.

As to the solutions for correcting the alignment, this becomes very individual depending upon the type of misalignment and needs of the skier.

If you are working with world class skiers who are in competition, then boot sole grinding is one alternative.

For the average skier, I would suggest this as a last alternative to underbinding ski cants.

Walking around on soles of ski boots specifically ground for alignment purposes is going to change that percision. Constanly having to ware some protective device on the boot is one additional hassle I can live without.

The one disadvantage to underbinding ski cants, is that there always has to be a right and left ski. The somewhat minor disadvantage, is being able to test skis for future purchase.

If possible, I still, prefer underbinding ski cants to boot sole grinding for noncompetitive skiers.

[ January 01, 2003, 09:10 AM: Message edited by: wink ]
post #9 of 35
Quote:
Originally posted by David M:

......If there is a place to start after the body it is with forward lean. Excessive forward is crippling the majority of skiers.
David M,

Could you explain this further?

I just returned from a four day ski trip after purchasing new boots. After four days in these boots, I definately feel the forward lean angle is too extreme for me.

I'm interested to hear your thoughts on forward lean.

What can be done to change it?

Boot info:
Technica Icon ALU with custom footbeds
Fitted by an ABB bootfitter

Thanks,

Chris Geib
post #10 of 35
Learner you have done your homework. My philosophy is that the minimum that should be looked at is the entire lower limb system from the feet to the pelvis. I prefer to look at the whole body. When I used to work on boots out of my own shop it was so well known that I wanted skiers in shorts for the preliminary examination that I didn’t even have to ask. Skiers just automatically wore them under their clothes.

I too am not keen on cants or ‘knee alignment’, which seems to be so ‘mainstream’ today. There are all kinds things that can cause lower limb dysfunctions including interference by the ski boot with the 3 dimensional movements of the structures of the foot. For the most part I am not keen on footbeds either although if skiers insist on using them without clear-cut indications and verifiable results then they should go with flexible ones as you suggest. In some cases rigid orthotics can produce excellent results but the intent is to influence the dynamic function of the foot and not ‘support it’ which is a contradiction considering the foot’s dynamic nature. The idea of supporting the foot for skiing is a marketing concept and nothing more.

Where I am very keen on alignment has to do with the position of the foot on the ski (whether straight ahead, abducted or adducted [turned outward or inward at the toes]) and the position of the ball of the great toe in relation to the ski edge. These aspects of alignment have a huge impact on the ability to develop a stable base of support. This is a subject I will get into in detail once I produce appropriate drawings.

In all other aspects I am in complete agreement especially when it comes to not buckling the boot buckles tightly but just closing them. I always recommend adjusting the boot so that the buckles are always closed to the same position.

Chris Geib – see the current thread on balance and alignment. The first step is to develop your stance outside of the ski boot and off the ski hill. You then adjust to boot to you. If you don’t then the ski boot will force your body to adjust stance to it.
post #11 of 35
David M,

I will do that.

Haven't been following that thread, but should have thought to, as balance is now the problem!

Thanks,

Chris Geib
post #12 of 35
Quote:
Originally posted by David M:
.... In some cases rigid orthotics can produce excellent results but the intent is to influence the dynamic function of the foot and not ‘support it’ which is a contradiction considering the foot’s dynamic nature. The idea of supporting the foot for skiing is a marketing concept and nothing more.

.
HOORAY!

I have only been saying this for 6 seasons - I want a 'footbed' that is like my orthotic - that is corrective NOT supportive - my foot doesn't need support to walk - it needs to be able to WORK! I have always thought the same should apply to skiing - but the bootfitters always swear it is OK that my foot is twisted on my leg - the ski boot will 'straighten it' .....
post #13 of 35
dsski:I have always thought the same should apply to skiing - but the bootfitters always swear it is OK that my foot is twisted on my leg - the ski boot will 'straighten it'
DM: Gag me! You are pretty smart dsski. The bootfitters need to start listening to you and THINKING.
post #14 of 35
No not smart - just with part of the circuitry missing you get a bit 'dependant' on the bits left working properly.
With the footbeds my feet have never felt 'stable' in the same way as in a walking boot. I am not expecting running shoe comfort & movement - but my walking boots are fairly stiff soled & I would like the amount of stability underfoot that I feel in them. In fact I feel the MOST stable in walking boots with my orthotics. Running shoes can feel a little like poor power steering - too much loss of feel of what is happening.

I am fussy about my shoes
post #15 of 35
dsski, you are fussy about your shoes for good reason.
post #16 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by David M
Where I am very keen on alignment has to do with the position of the foot on the ski (whether straight ahead, abducted or adducted [turned outward or inward at the toes]) and the position of the ball of the great toe in relation to the ski edge. These aspects of alignment have a huge impact on the ability to develop a stable base of support. This is a subject I will get into in detail once I produce appropriate drawings.
Whatever happened to David M? I've just "discovered" his posts/theories, and am quite enthralled by them. Any chance of the "position of the foot on the ski" alignment issue to be explained?

Cheers!
post #17 of 35
I'll drop him a note and see if he'll stop by...
post #18 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Si
4) Ramp Angle. How do you assess the correct ramp angle (sum of angles from boot, binding, and lifters). How do you adjust ramp angle both inside and outside of the boot?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, however, I think he is confusing ramp angle with delta angle.

Isn't ramp the angle of the foot in the boot....eseentially the base of the foot on the boot board and delta the angle of the boot base?
post #19 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy

Isn't ramp the angle of the foot in the boot....eseentially the base of the foot on the boot board
Clarify Rusty. Base of foot in relation to what? Ground? Boot bottom?



Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy

and delta the angle of the boot base?
Again, boot base to what? Ground? Top of ski.

Rusty, what term do you asign to the angle between the ground and the base of the foot? Do you agree that the ground to foot base angle, combined with a compatible boot cuff to foot base angle are the crucial angles?
post #20 of 35
I'm with Arcmeister.
In the end though it comes down to trial and error.
One of our coaches at camp is a member of the Vail Ski School and was a member of their "syncro team the year they won the "Battle of the Ski Schools". He and I spent many late nights this year fiddling with ramp angle, cuff padding, tongue pads, spoilers, etc as he demoed a couple different boots as well as worked on dialing his own in a little better. He mentioned that what worked in the middle of the season didn't seem to work as well now. It's an ongoing process.(that last little bit)
post #21 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Clarify Rusty. Base of foot in relation to what? Ground? Boot bottom?




Again, boot base to what? Ground? Top of ski.

Rusty, what term do you asign to the angle between the ground and the base of the foot? Do you agree that the ground to foot base angle, combined with a compatible boot cuff to foot base angle are the crucial angles?
This will be my "gap theory"!

IN THEORY one could have a delta angle that results in the toes higher than the heel while having a ramp angle with the heel higher than the toes. Remember I said in theory. In fact I may come fairly close to that.

Ramp measured by drawing two lines. One along the inside of an empty shell of a boot and the second from heel to toe of the foot in a boot with bootboard and orthotic. Essentially it is how high ones heel is stacked inside a boot.

Delta measured by one line drawn parrallel to the base of the ski and one line drawn outside the base of the boot. This angle primarily impacted by raising a binding toe-piece.

As far as the importance of all this including cuff angle?

I hope you were merely being rhetorical and soliciting discussion. It's huge.

It is interesting that this older thread mentions AB-duction as well as AD-duction. I made the switch to the Fischer ski boot as did Bob Barnes primarily due to the 10 degree lateral rotation or adduction of the foot.
post #22 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Clarify Rusty. Base of foot in relation to what? Ground? Boot bottom?




Again, boot base to what? Ground? Top of ski.

Rusty, what term do you asign to the angle between the ground and the base of the foot? Do you agree that the ground to foot base angle, combined with a compatible boot cuff to foot base angle are the crucial angles?
Rick as far as terms used in the industry, what I've always heard is ramp angle is angle of top of boot board inside boot relative to outside base of boot, while delta angle is angle of boot pad on top of binding relative to bottom of binding or ski base. You asked a good question about what we call the sum total of both. we need this diferentiation in order to talk about the various factors that influence this. Not that I need to tell you this, but others need this clarification, because there seems to be alot of confusion with it. In a conversation about boots, like anything else we need desciptive terms with precise meaning. You're good at terms, do you have a term for the total or ever heard of one? I think we need one.

On the subject of the bodies natural alignment and it's influence on boot fit and skiing, is there really any question that the way we move everyday and our state of functinal fitness has an impact on everything we do in the way of sport activities? I think it is a cop out to say otherwise. It is simply wrong to say that everyone can ski with the same effectiveness irrespective of their functional fitness, or that boot alignment and technique alone will put everyone on the same level. So here I think David is right on. If someone is interested in totaly dialing in their boots, there should be an evaluation of the physiological variables in the interest of the synergism that exists between our equipment and our body. The problem this presents is that it requires a knowledge in areas that many dismiss or resist in the industry.

I know I've said that I don't like car anlogies, but picture a car with the frame out of alignment and the difficulty in keeping it running straight. Now a car has bolts and shims to correct this misalignment, but our body has muscles and connective tissue that serves this purpose and this is where we need to make the correction, unless it is just not possible. And just like putting new tires on a car out of alignment still doesn't solve the need to compensate, putting dialed in boots on a skier usually won't solve the problems in the bodies need to compensate for misalignment either. Tackle the problem at the source.

Hope this isn't too strong, but the more I learn the more convinced I am that this is so, and the more knowledgable people I come in contact with in this area, the more this is reinforced. The more functional harmony we have off the slope, the more harmony we will find on the slope. Later, Ric.
post #23 of 35
Ramp angle is referring to "in the boot" relationship fore aft of foot. Delta angle refers to outside the boot sole influencing angles. Could be bindnigs, ski thickness, or sole plates or any combination of all. I like to think I was instrumental in bringing these diferences to light . Just keep it simple gang.
post #24 of 35
The old K.I.S.S. principal.
post #25 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, however, I think he is confusing ramp angle with delta angle.

Isn't ramp the angle of the foot in the boot....eseentially the base of the foot on the boot board and delta the angle of the boot base?
Is that not what I said?????
post #26 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
Is that not what I said?????
Yep, you sure did. I'm more interested in what effect the combined angle of ramp and delta does to our stance, than who drew attention to it first.

If we accept that both delta and ramp angle have an impact on our stance, then why does the industry play with these two seperate from each other? I can accept that there are some physical limitations in bindings that require certain heel heights for certain designs, but neither the binding companies nor the boot makers want to talk about the effect their "angles" have on skiers. They almost seem to try to hide the information on their respective ramp and delta angles.

from a consumer point of view, if we can choose a binding that has neutral delta angle, then we have eliminated one area of concern. It doesn't do me much good to spend time modifying my boots for good fuctional stance, if I then put them in different ski/binding setups with different delta angles. I know my previous atomic bindings have zero delta, how many other bindings have this, and does anyone know if the atomics are still neutral?

Besides footbeds, how many have modified their boots for a better stance, and what did you do to them? Anyone care to share? Later, RicB.
post #27 of 35
I raised my toe to straighten my tib/fib and hence create an upper body with more forward lean.

I am not sure binding companies hide any facts. I know the Marker product that I use has a heel five mm higher than the toe. I utilize products they sell to raise the toe. It simply involves shims from their "cant kit".

I just think most skiers could either care less or don't want to bother with the changes.

In addition, I think the primary reason changes are made to ramp angles/boot boards are in cases involving females who have calf muscles that dont fit well into a boot.
post #28 of 35
My response to marker, is why sell a kit ot raise the toe, why not simply make the binding with zero angle. Remove the delta angle and keep it from being an issue with stance. For those that understand this issue there are the kits, for those that don't there is simply compensation moves and stance issues. I se room for improvement here.

I think it's a leap to say skiers don't care, I think they don't the know the difference this angle can make. this brings me back to the first poiint, which is why build in something that has such an effect that few understand enough to correct.

The issue of short legs and large calf muscles is another example of how we correct one, can actually have a larger negative impact on stance. Also shows the reluctance of boot makers to address the issue properly. I assume you are talking about heels lifts and wedges.

I would hope that there are skiers who do boot work for other reasons than to raise the heel, such as finding their ideal ramp angle for better stance and dealing with forward lean. What about forward lean Rusty? Do you ever go beyond the factory settings? Later, RicB.
post #29 of 35
The binding delta angle is an important aspect of alignment that I think is often overlooked.

Last season I went to Jeff Bergeron to set up my alignment. He had me bring my skis with me. One of the things he takes into account is the delta angle of the bindings, so that when you step into your bindings you have correct fore/aft alignment. If you buy new skis with a binding that has a significantly different delta angle, he can adjust for that with shims under the bindings without changing your footbeds or boots, but it would be easier to stick with the same kind of bindings.

Chris,

Does that Technica Icon ALU have the adjustment for forwad lean? When I skied in Technicas I found that they worked best for me if I adjusted the forward lean about to its most upright position. I carried a screwdiriver for the first few days in them so that I could adjust them on the hill to find the best position.

Jim
post #30 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by David M
If there is a place to start after the body it is with forward lean. Excessive forward is crippling the majority of skiers.
Hey folks, I am resurrecting this thread. I have been working on my aligment for years and have used "The Athletic Skier" as a major source. Witherell had the opposite opinion of David M. He felt most skiers were stuck in the backseat because of stiff boots, too upright a stance, and not enough delta angle in the bindings.

Personally I have been too upright in all my boots over the years because I have a very skinny calf and ankle, and using Witherells approach has helped me feel more balanced. But that is my particular problem. Why are people going to more upright boots, when a very analytical race coach like Witherell was espousing more forward lean and ramp angle just a decade ago?

Does the switch to short, shaped skis call for a change in boot angles? LewBob
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 › Demystifying the Alignment Process