Yes people, you can ski in any stance or method you want to. I keep using the phrase "ski for yourself" don't I?
Personally, I have always liked posts from Pierre eh? Because he questions things, and doesn't make demands, or cry foul. This is exactly what I mean by "ski for yourself". Right on, Pierre eh? It's a forum
As a previous advocate of a wider stance, I understand these concerns quite well.
I was skeptical, about two years ago. But I tried things, and learned a lot.
Lisamarie, I have issues with leg length issues myself. And one foot is a lot more flexible than the other, with wide hips (lookit, that boy's got big ol' butt) for a guy.
Upset when somene tried to get me in a narrower stance? Why sure! I used to be that way as well, because I was not comfortable, narrow!
To balance effectively, with a smaller base of support (narrower stance), the skiers alignment, boots, and footbed MUST be dialed in with more accuracy, or it will be very difficult to ski in balance. If you are not in balance already, a narrow stance does NOT feel right!
As an example, my alignment situation:
Right leg is shorter than the left.
Right foot is more flexible (ankle sprains, never sprained the left).
Both feet flex inside (pronation).
Knock kneed, especially on right leg.
Both footbeds are posted (thicker) on the BTE edge, right foot is posted a bit thicker than the left. I used to use 2-3 degrees of canting. With the changes in my stance, I use a little bit of cuff cant (to the outside) and 1.5-2 degrees of canting underfoot.
I am in better balance with these changes, Look at the changes I made in the amount of canting... isn't that interesting? This is pretty important, can any of you figure out why? Hint: The cuff cant change was slight, and it's NOT the reason.
I keep using the phrase "functional narrow stance". If a skier cannot balance in a narrower stance, well then they won't. And won't "buy into it". But why doesn't it work?
Lismarie, in your other discussions, you have mentioned the boot you are in. Your boot is probably (I have not seen you ski, or messed with your boots) causing you to be even more knock need than you want. So you ski in a wider stance to compensate for it
. It is quite common.
Once aligned for a functional narrow stance, you would feel comfortable using it. And be able to do these "narrow stance moves".
This is why a person needs to go "all the way". It is not because of an innate need to "trash" or "argue" that one is better than the other, it's because "A is A".
If a skier is not aligned to take full advantage of the Kinetic Chain issues fully, then they are missing part of it. A narrow stance is an important piece to skiing this way. It simply works better, and you would be better at dynamic balance. Once dialed in, you would be able to make effective
small adjustments at the base of support. Easier skiing, better performance.
This would get you giggling uncontrollably. Oh I think so!
These issues are why I am interested in your boot search experiences, Lisamarie. With your described (I want to measure this stuff on you) wide hipped, knock kneed stance issues, please take a close look at this: http://www.peterkeelty.com/bootindex.htm
And especially: http://www.peterkeelty.com/bootdesign.htm
Pretty important, especially the lateral and ramp angle issues.
BTW, because of my body's build, my skis are slightly wider, but in a functional narrow stance, for me. More width is noticed during the middle of a turn, but it is the effect of vertical separation, and not being wide stanced... My boots darn near (not quite) clunk together when transitioning from one turn to the next. I do not hold them there during the whole turn! I make them clunk, while I was learning how, and still do. I like the drills with holding the car sponge between my boots. Helped me learn to ski better. It was harder to do, till I adjusted my alignment some, for the narrower stance.
Visit me here >>>SnoKarver
[This message has been edited by SnoKarver (edited August 27, 2001).]</FONT>