J2Ski Forum Posts and Replies by ise

Trencher wrote:
We were actually talking about big risers, not the run of the mill set ups.

yes, and I was pointing out that a run of the mill set up would be under 45mm already. So, if we're talking about run of the mill set ups then you're saying they're already below the level FIS though was dangerous and i agree, that's what I said.

Trencher wrote:

One thing is for sure, big riser plates make you look very serious 8).

Trencher

:lol:

Trencher

bandit wrote:

ise wrote:

That's partly related to flex isn't it? You could produce some sort of measure of flex per unit length and find that flap point or the the point at which it's hard to get the ski to hold in a turn. So a ski that works for me at 180 probably wouldn't work at 170 but equally something floppy at 180 would have just the same problem.

Well, I was thinking in less technical terms as usual :oops:

More along the lines of the ski being over flexed all the time, and the ski not being able to be used over it's length and the problems that would arise from that :D

Isn't that the same thing in different words? I was just thinking that I can ski a short stiff ski but a short floppy ski is a nightmare, so it's some combination of length and flex.

Basically when you turn you're bending the ski to an arc so the full contact length is describing that arc, if it's already loaded there's no where to go.

To put a different question for the original, would having a short ski have benefits? and the answer is yes providing the flex is matched to your weight and ability, skis aren't so much sold on length now for that reason I guess.

bandit wrote:I think it will likely flap at speed, and therefore be a chore and not a delight.

That's partly related to flex isn't it? You could produce some sort of measure of flex per unit length and find that flap point or the the point at which it's hard to get the ski to hold in a turn. So a ski that works for me at 180 probably wouldn't work at 170 but equally something floppy at 180 would have just the same problem.

Trencher wrote:

ise wrote:
Otherwise that's about right. It's just another example of a ski myth defying all evidence. In fact, ski accidents measured by mean time between accidents or number of accidents per skier days are going down. Even knee injuries, measured by reported ACL injuries are going down as well. Snowboarding and snowblading figures are going the other way, in the latter case there is a real level effect.

Like many ski myths if people just stopped and thought about it they'd see it's not likely to be true, binding's have improved so very much that they're able to open under a huge range of forces from different directions unlike 20 or even 10 years ago.

Don't want to keep a myth alive, but didn't the FIS reduce regulation stand height from 55mm to 45mm because of an increase in knee injuries to racers ? Wouldn't like to think those stimulators of ski innovation relyed on urban legends for guidance :wink:

Trencher

I'm not sure we can draw many conclusions from what racers experience, it's a little different from the rest of the skiing public. There's a couple of surveys, one re-posted here a few days back, which show that incidence in racers is higher. While many people ski on kit heavily based on race stock gear very few actually have access to real race stock gear. I can't imagine many recreational skiers have stand heights of 55mm )

RoseR wrote:

IceGhost wrote:Sounds like my dad. Admin is right. That's gotta be some pretty rank ripe stuff to conjure up some embalming fluid. How would you even get that into a conversation? Something on the order of : Hon your feet stink, try Formaldehyde it works for the no longer living.

if it pickles your feet can you salt them, cut them off and put them in a jar?

No its a very dilute solution that you soak your feet in for a little while, then wash it off. It does not leave a smell it just stuns the sweat glands into not working. Its prescribed quite a lot.

isn't that a bad thing? sweat is good surely? it's why we evolved the mechanism.

bandit wrote:

snowboardfairy wrote:I did this day trip last year lAST MINUTE OFFERED RETURN DEAL FOR £99!!!!!!!
IT WAS AMAzING AND ABOUT £20 FOR A DAY PASS......BARGAIN

IT IS £169 THIS YEAR.......

I remember this trip being advertised last year, and you are spot on with the price. Is inflation really that bad :shock:

hard to say isn't it? obviously it's gong to be a factor and 20% is the figure an organisation I'm a member of is reckoning for increases in alpine training costs, but they might have been doing a bit of a loss leader as well, these things are rarely transparent.

freezywater wrote:

ise wrote: it takes too long to stop in a snow plough to say it's controlled, it's just a transition skill before they learn to stop properly.

I've always wondered about that, is it not more to do with learning to turn than stop anyway :?:

mostly that's what people think and I'd agree, it's just there's only so much you can teach in a short time so a snow plough lets you tick the two most important boxes i.e. control of speed and direction, you can steer and stop with a snow plough so it's handy for a beginner. The alternative is teaching two different techniques and it's too much to take in. That said, if I understand their syllabus the PSIA method isn't to teach snow ploughs at all so it's a matter of some discussion.

davidmpires wrote:http://www.londonfreeze.com/

Anyone going?

it's like chart music in making me feel old, I've only heard of two of those skiers )

Ski & Snowboard at Battersea Power Station...+ Live Music Started by User in Ski Chatter, 2 Replies
davidmpires wrote:http://www.londonfreeze.com/ Anyone going? it's like chart music in making me feel old, I've only heard of two of those skiers )

Messages posted by : ise