 Poster: A snowHead
|
| CEM wrote: |
| as i described a while back when we make an orthotic i look at the foot, the ability the flexibility or of the foot the usage etc etc. i do favour the superfeet kork ssh, they do now have a soft cushion under the arch, this is one product that is completely mis understood by many instructors and bootfitters [especially those who used the old version but not the new] the most common belief is that it locks the foot...... the only thing that locks is the mid tarsal joint as the forefoot is pronated against the rearfoot to find sub talar neutral whilst constructing the product. |
I want to be clear that there was a reason I described the old one. The new ones are fine, as far as I've been able to discern. It sounds like your approach is a very good one, and would help many folks who are willing to take the time and pay the cost of visiting you (and likely would improve their balance and skiing as a result, regardless of their skill level). Didn't mean to imply otherwise. But, you did send us off to that other web site!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| CEM wrote: |
little tiger, i am struggling to see what you are talking about on my site, we use different orthotics due to the fact that your foot bends whilst you walk, the ones we use in ski boots are a bit more rigid under the forefoot,[ if you bend them every step they will eventually snap, the ones for dsaily use are designed to bend]
|
i did not mean YOUR site...but the site you posted the link to....
which says this
| Quote: |
| Skiing is not walking, what your foot does inside the boot is nothing like walking. In skiing we study what we call “Sustained Dynamic Midstance”. In walking foot beds pedorthists study “Dynamic Gate”. You need to understand the difference to make a skiing specific foot bed. Why put a walking foot bed in a ski boot? |
but as i understand the bircage experiments showed that HIGH LEVEL skiers in fact did have a type of "heel strike" and used pronation.... in fact they also showed a need for more room around the toes which lead to atomic providing a wider toe area(foot needs to spread to function properly)
Are there more(and more recent) studies showing need for sustained midstance?
Or do I misunderstand the whole thing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
ssh, little tiger, sorry confused you which confused me which.......
i am looking at setting something up with a guy i do a lot of boot balance with, we are looking at doing a ski boot MOT type thing with balance appointments...not sure what when and how but i will let people know [if i am allowed]
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
CEM, Now you're acting like a performing seal, arf, arf. I can't see you getting to grips with the language of DISNEY though!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, not disney this stuff, just the basics of fine tuning
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Ah, Disney. They're a pretty good company when it comes to delivering a quality product. And their approach is exemplary, even though imperfect. I wouldn't mind being positively compared to them.
But, balance isn't Disney. It's essential. And you can't possibly believe that the same skier will be in equal balance in (for instance) a Tecnica Diablo Race and a Nordica Doberman and an Atomic RT and a Head RD. Each is different in terms of bootboard angle and forward lean angle. As a result, they will "fit" different people even if their lasts were identical (which they aren't, of course). To pretend that comfort is more important than balance is to ignore the most essential and foundational skill of skiing: stance and balance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, a boot that fits badly but is well balanced will ski better than a boot that fits well that isnt balanced? Chicken or Egg?
My Disney comments reside in the fact that the terminology used is, well Disney, we build the boots here in Europe, clog and cuff, by the time they reach the good old U S of A/O, it's upper shell and lower shell. 
I think this is a very important process, ssh, one that will make a big difference, however to put it above fit, flex and physiology, is at best, naive if not a little desperate. I'm not sure enough progressive/recreational skiers have edge/snow contact, let alone appropriate weight distribution at speed, to invest the time in this process.
I and maybe you do have the time and intrest in this, Colin's point about physiology is not to be confused with fine tuning.
Th, th, thatssss all folks(not Disney, i know, but you catch my drift)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SMALLZOOKEEPER, of course it will ski better! But, it will hurt more. Not ideal, certainly.
I didn't put it "above fit, flex and physiology," by the way, and I don't appreciate the implication that I am either naive or desperate. What I am suggesting is that just fitting a boot so that it's comfortable is a crap shoot. It must fit and be balanced. If "boot balancing" is "Disney," what would you call it? I am talking about the process of making sure that when the skier is in neutral in the boot cuff s/he is balanced fore/aft and laterally. That there is a range of motion both flex and extend. And that movements are unrestricted by the interaction of the boot and the body. Of course, this means that the boots do not hurt and are fit to the foot (the shell, that is, not merely the liner).
What do you mean by it?
I'd encourage you to be mindful that, while you undoubtedly have some expertise in this area, you are not the only one, and may not know or understand the expertise of others with whom you are conversing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| I'm not sure enough progressive/recreational skiers have edge/snow contact, let alone appropriate weight distribution at speed, to invest the time in this process. |
I argue that this is an effect of poorly fit and balanced equipment for many such skiers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| SMALLZOOKEEPER wrote: |
| I'm not sure enough progressive/recreational skiers have edge/snow contact, let alone appropriate weight distribution at speed, to invest the time in this process. |
I originally understood the 'everyone should be on 177cm Karmas' ZOO policy to mean
'69mm waists were not ordained on high and what difference 69 or 75 or 82 or 100mm as that's mere mechanistic debate about a lever outside the boot that will amplify what goes on in the boot for good or ill' .
Is this a hanging up of arms after the first boot awareness campaign is won?
EDIT: apologies for an apparent ganging up on ya here, I hadn't read ssh's posts when I clicked. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
