noschoolrider

Old man Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine history for a number of reasons. Among them, the fact that he is physically predisposed to ski well. Also the fact that he eschewed conventional wisdom for a better way to ski, something the establishment can't seem to accept or figure out. And also, when you've skied as long and as well as he did, you make a crap-load of mistakes, mistakes which nicely informed his storied success. He is an anomaly though. Most racers peak and fade earlier in life. Is your banter detector broken? You didn't catch that I wrote "old man Bode Miller" as a teasing response to BlueB's (Boris') comment, "The very fact that an old man is winning where he probably shouldn't"? FYI, I'm older than Bode and Jasey-Jay, so I'm the real old man. The purpose of including the blurb about Bode Miller was to add a short tidbit that serves as a witty reply to Boris' comment and as a setup for my attempt to get Boris' detailed opinion of what is so "very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing". The blurb about Bode only works well in that context if it's short and sweet (that's why I used only one sentence). I like the six sentences you wrote about Bode, however that amount of content would have been way too big/wordy to serve my purpose (banter). Um, yea, Boris wrote, "The very fact that an old man is winning where he probably shouldn't" Snowboard racers have fewer options than ski racers when it comes to creating/increasing energy/speed and improving their line. In some situations, it is beneficial for snowboard racers to use rebound energy to increase/maintain speed. Up-unweighting is useful in situations where it results in more speed than the other choices would provide. Example: Pumping the board to increase/maintain speed (this is only beneficial/effective at lower speeds). I also thought I made it clear that I think using rebound to be 'Jumpy' is not using rebound in an efficient/beneficial manner. That is why I wrote, "Jasey-Jay also did a better job of keeping his board in contact with the snow (most of the time), which was the best choice (faster) for that course." I also believe that the more time the board spends in the air the more that speed/time are lost. I also find it mind-boggling that so many snowboard racers continue to deliberately let their boards move far above the snow (and spend so much time in the air), instead of trying to use rebound energy to move forward (versus more upward) and/or do a better job of keeping their boards in contact with the snow. With all due respect Don, if you buy into this kind of antiquated/self important information, you're doing yourself a disservice. Don't sugarcoat it, tell me how you really feel :) The quote you used above is from my positive reply to Jack's comment in which Jack indicated he believed Jasey-Jay's win was partly because "he carves more and better than most others". The reason I included the links to those articles is because they contain debatable alternatives to the conviction that the racer who carves the most all the time always wins. Do you to believe that conviction is not debatable? If you have links to subject related articles/information that you believe are less antiquated/self important then please feel free to share, because I'm always seeking more knowledge and alternatives to experiment with. When read I your comments (in various topics/threads), I get the impression you despise modern snowboard racing and that you also don't like modern snowboard equipment? Do I have the wrong impression? Anyway, do you have any proof that your superior knowledge and information leads to the best results in snowboard racing (e.g. national championship wins or world cup wins)? *************************** For entertainment purposes only :) Which of the following best describes a self important person? 1. A person who is sharing articles (written by professionals) that they think others might find interesting. Or 2. A person who thinks every professional in the race community is wrong except for them, and that they know more than every snowboard race equipment builder and every coach.

You're welcome, and thank you for your openness and honesty. Some negative feelings/perspectives about the FIS are understandably due to what happened to the International Snowboard Federation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Snowboard_Federation) and because of the anti-hard-boot attitude that resulted in major changes to Bordercross courses. Yea, I also enjoyed watching races on courses like the one in the 1998 Nagano Olympics, and I also understand why some people don't care for modern snowboard racing (I like it)... But, it is what it is, and I think that anything (like racing) that gives alpine snowboarding more exposure is good for the sport. That event looks like fun and Sigi Grabner is a fun guy and a great businessman. However, that type of event does not specifically showcase (or benefit) alpine snowboarding and obviously that's not Sigi's intention. Like you said, it's more of an exposition event, and it's also good for Sigi's snowboard business.

Good comments Jack. Everything you stated are part of why Jasey-Jay won that race. However, there is one obvious (in my opinion) technique that Jasey-Jay used to create more speed. Watch how Jasey-Jay was using rebound to extend his body upward so he could more effectively (and aggressively) pressure the edge (pump) at the top of the turns (right as he enters the fall-line), which resulted in more speed. Because the course was on a moderate slope and had a bigger off-set (similar to the course he won Olympic gold on), Jasey-Jay had the right conditions to do more carving and to create additional speed by pumping. Jasey-Jay also did a better job of keeping his board in contact with the snow (most of the time), which was the best choice (faster) for that course. The mistake he made (shown in slow motion) was caused by over-pressuring the edge as he hit the washboard ruts, however he had enough speed and momentum (and skill/experience) to recover. Determination, training, skill and experience are a winning combination. Here are some educational articles that race enthusiasts might find interesting: https://deadspin.com/ted-ligety-is-skidding-his-way-to-a-skiing-revolution-1526280295 https://www.skiracing.com/stories/shiffrin-in-soelden-from-good-skiing-to-fast-skiing http://www.ronlemaster.com/articles/skidding-SR6_TechTalk.pdf http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Stivot http://www.ronlemaster.com/presentations/USSA-symposium-Copper-Mt-2015.pdf

Jumpy is not a style - what you're seeing is rebound, which sometimes is not used in the most efficient/beneficial manner. The courses vary based on course setter choice, location (including steepness and width of the hill) and snow/weather conditions. Look at the difference between the 2002 Olympic course and the course in Bansko that JJA just won on. JJA was the fastest because he used the best technique for that course and those conditions, and he obviously trained hard to get physically ready. So, just like 'old man' Bode Miller, Jasey-Jay's win was due to his determination, training, skill and experience. The majority of the racers and spectators disagree with your opinion. The parallel format attracts a lot more spectators than the single course format did. In most parallel races, spectators can see the entire race from the finish area, the parallel events have a faster pace, the head-to-head format is more exciting, and spectators get to watch the best racers make more runs. Most people don't want to watch alpine snowboarders do the same single course race format as skiers (the ski racers are a lot faster). FIS alpine snowboard events in Europe and Asia have a large fan base and great spectator attendance. Other than the 2002 and 2010 Olympics, the alpine snowboard events in North America have very poor support/attendance. They already have an event that has most of what you want and it's not very popular - Red Bull Edge by Sigi Grabner:

Actually, it's the opposite of what you believe. Spectator attendance of the single course races was declining because people did not want to watch alpine snowboarders do the same races as skiers (the ski racers were faster so their races were more exciting to watch). FIS switched alpine snowboard races to the parallel format to save alpine snowboard racing and it worked. The parallel format attracts a lot more spectators than the single course format did. In most parallel races, spectators can see the entire race from the finish area, the parallel events have a faster pace, the head-to-head format is more exciting, and spectators get to watch the best racers make more runs.

Relax, all right? My old man is a television repairman, he's got this ultimate set of tools. I can fix it… By converting it...

Edwin Coratti has been using this...

When 'old man' Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine skiing history most experts said his win was due to his determination, training, skill and experience. However, when Jasey-Jay wins a world cup event at 42 you say it's because "something is very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing". Would you prefer snowboard competitions that have perfectly-rounded drawn-out turns (which would slow the competitors down) and 2' high limbo bars (to force competitors into fully laid out body slides) and have judges give extra credit based on who made the prettiest turns? I'm interested in your detailed opinion of what is so "very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing". Please feel free to include the usual comments about how metal boards and plate systems create a negative image of the sport, and about how metal boards and plates are responsible for racing becoming lost to a 'down the line path' where racers just throw their boards around (like two athletes racing pogo sticks downhill). The following information and videos might help you refine your opinion: Shortly after the 1998 Olympics several European snowboard racers were asked for their opinions about Jasey-Jay Anderson's race technique and the general consensus was: Jasey-Jay is too aggressive - he is a risk taker who throws his board around too much. Philipp Schoch - 2002 Olympics Men's Parallel Giant Slalom (you need to use the link below because YouTube will not allow that video to be embedded): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Ds4-9DdTE Philipp Schoch - 2006 Olympics Men's Parallel Giant Slalom (you need to use the link below because YouTube will not allow that video to be embedded): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8so8H_fCJZA Jasey-Jay Anderson - 2010 Olympics Men's Parallel Giant Slalom (you need to use the link below because YouTube will not allow that video to be embedded): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB79JDyYYa8 Vic Wild - 2014 Olympics Men's Parallel Giant Slalom (you need to use the link below because YouTube will not allow that video to be embedded): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDilQWhZxfk FIS Rogla - 2018 Men's Parallel Giant Slalom snowboard race highlights FIS Bansko - 2018 Men's Parallel Giant Slalom snowboard race highlights

Sorry, I forgot to include the names of the boards for images 2 & 3 - I fixed it in my original post. If you meant the one in the second image that little beauty is the 2014 Cross Board (the third image is a PTC Multi Edge Snowboard / Deuce) https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2014/07/meet-the-cross-board-one-aussies-decades-long-journey-to-revolutionise-snowboarding/ I have not tried the Cross Board and I think both companies are out of business (their websites are expired), but I tried one like it about 27 years ago. Even back then, it was not as much fun as a low end Sims or Burton board. Here is one of the versions by Deuce (it looks like a skidder):

alpinegirl beat me to it on the Hobie (double edge snowboard) and Jib Tech, I mean Lib Tech is trying to bring it back from the dead: Not my cup of tea... Hobie - Double Edge Snowboard Deuce Snowboards - Dual Edge Snowboard (DES) Lib Tech DUH XC2 BTX - Double Edge Snowboard Cross Board (below) PTC Multi Edge Snowboard / Deuce (below)

Thanks Corey, I probably should show my 'less technical' and softer/gentler side more often :)

In addition to the good stuff Eric Brammer wrote… Some of the benefits: It helps 'balance the power' (see below), reduces the time it takes the racer to get into the optimum position for pressuring the toe-side edge, helps the racer achieve (and maintain) a position that overall uses a lower center of mass (versus being in a position that favors spending more time vertically upright), and it helps prevent/reduce extreme/excess pressure on the shin of the rear leg. Take a look at the image of Jasey-Jay Anderson below… In the image of Jasey-Jay's toe-side turn, focus on how hard/much he is driving his rear leg knee downward. Imaging how much pressure (and possibly pain) he would feel on his shin if his rear boot were in more of an upright position. Even when the boot is able to travel from a more upright position to the position it is in the picture - think about the advantage of starting out with the boot in more of the desired outcome position versus having to move the boot into that position. Also, when you set the rear binding in a forward angle like racers (and many alpine snowboarders) use, it makes engaging the heel-side edge even easier and quicker, which then makes it take a little more time and effort to go from heel-side to toe-side than it would if the rear binding were at a very low angel (or at zero degrees). Most snowboard race coaches (and racers) feel that having the rear boot at a more forward angle helps 'balance the power' (balances the time and effort it takes to move from edge-to-edge). Other considerations: Even during an extreme heel-side race turn there's a lot less pressure on the boot cuffs (the upper back area of the boots) than there is on the front of the boots during a toe-side turn. In order to increase (or get similar) pressure on the back of boots during a heel-side turn you would need to move your foot/toes downward (plantar flexion) and/or straighten your legs and lean backward - doing either (or both) would be really bad. Because of this, some racers feel they don't need much (or don't need any) rear suspension/springs, and need very little (or no additional) rearward range-of-motion from the boots. The Deeluxe RAB system that Ester Ledecka uses is kind of like an upside down version of Nevin Galmarini's modified BTS setup. The RAB system uses a rubber/elastomer bushing on the top (instead of a spring) for the rearward boot pressure, and the adjustable forward flex spring is on the bottom. I would not be surprised if Nevin Galmarini also has a rubber/elastomer bushing at the top of his stack of washers. The image below shows a Deeluxe RAB spring on a Deeluxe Indy boot.

Sounds like fun. Riding with and seeing what his friends do might lead to him spending more time on toe side. You don't sound frustrated at all - you sound like a great father and I sensed humor where you wrote "how to trick kids". Welcome back to snowboarding. P.S. some of the best parents I know successfully trick their kids a lot

In addition to what I wrote above there's a few other things that may or may not be helpful… I'm reluctant to bring this up because some people may take this the wrong way, but here it is anyway: When someone feels they are being forced to do something they don't want to do the fun factor decreases and they can also lose interest. When teaching, try to keep things fun and please don't have expectations that are too high, especial regarding how much progress is made (what is learned) and how long it takes to make progress. When I am teaching, I always focus on safety, fun and learning (in that order). During the lesson I try to provide my students more fun than they'd have if they were freeriding with their friends - that's a great 'trick'.

I don't have children of my own, however as a professional instructor and coach I've been presented with this situation many times. This is the only type of student I get that will say they don't want (or need) the snowboard lesson their parent(s) signed them up for. In your son's situation he most likely feels very strong and confident on heel side, and he doesn't want to acknowledged any weakness or lack of confidence on the toe side, because that would make him feel less like a pro and more like a lower level rider. Often, the solution to this situation, is expanding their perception of how a pro rides (what a real pro looks like and the things a pro can do), which includes all types of toe side turns, toe side maneuvers, and toe side tricks. It can be helpful to watch good riders with your son (and/or watch video of good snowboarders doing the things you want to focus on - you can even edit/create your own video) and ask your son what he sees when the riders are on their toe side. Ask if he thinks those things look fun, and if that versatility makes the rider better than the ones who can only ride on their heel side. This is part of guided discovery learning (one of the many 'tricks'). When I'm teaching, I like to work 'with' the student on setting goals that will address what they are lacking and will help them achieve what they need. If they don't think they need any help (or what I think they need) then I like to show them fun things that require the skills they're lacking and then ask if they want to try them (then learn them). If not, then I setup little challenges. If I still get a 'no' then I say something like - do you think good snowboarders can do it?, and/or something like - what's it going to be like when everyone else you ride with is doing cool things like that? I also let them know that even as a professional I am always trying to get better and always trying to learn new things. Basically, I try to influence my students into thinking they want to do it, that they are the one who chose what to work on, and that they helped determine what their goal(s) should be. Also, group lessons and/or group riding in a situation where they are all working on the same things (and/or being with other kids and seeing them do it) can be very helpful.

Thank you for sharing that yamifumi. You're right, it looks like their retail prices have been on their contact page for awhile now. It's good to hear you were assisted by such a highly skilled and experienced representative. Your information might help some doubtful people gain confidence in Allflex's business model, their retailers, and in their large range of plates. Just curious: Did you use your plate on a board that was built for the specific plate you ordered?

The answer you wanted is 'no' because you are seeking confirmation of your negative beliefs. I did not give you what you wanted. I understand why some people don't like the look of modern snowboard racing and I understand why some people don't like the look of snowboarders sliding their extended bodies on the snow. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Personally, I like to try everything and learn to do all of it. However, in my opinion, your concerns seem a bit melodramatic because I find it difficult to believe that snowboard racing, riding on plates or metal boards are going to have a negative effect on recreational alpine snowboarding. In my opinion, equipment keeps getting better and better (like the Swoard EC Pro Metal). The snowboarding done by Sigi (on his plate) in the video below seems to give a clear (and positive) image of the sport, and the carving looks fun to me. The video is a few years old, however snowboard race technique and parallel race courses shifted to "a down the line path" long before this video was made (they vary based on course setter choice, location and conditions). Freeriding on plates still looks the same (and fun) to me. Philipp Schoch - 2002 Olympics Men's Parallel Giant Slalom (you need to use the link below because YouTube will not allow that video to be embedded): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Ds4-9DdTE FIS Rogla - January 2018 Men's Parallel Giant Slalom snowboard race highlights

Those Kessler snowboards and the Allflex plates are about $1,500 each, so I don't think either company is targeting the average "enthusiast". Beckmann AG: "The latter almost requires consulting a third party to assist with a purchasing decision, and it's still a crapshoot." Non-professionals cannot purchase directly from Allflex. Authorized Allflex retailers are provided with the information (including rider biometric questions) to ask the customer so the customer can get the correct plate that will meet their needs (similar to when you purchase a ski race binding, or custom order an alpine snowboard). Beckmann AG: "A ski race binding sold to a recreational skier brings more money into alpine skiing. Offering 'too many' plates is a good way for Allflex to bring more money into Allflex." When a recreational snowboarder/skier purchases an Allflex plate from an authorized retailer how does that not provide a similar benefit to the retailer/industry? Several different companies offer multiple choices of ski race bindings. Is that 'too many' or just enough ski race bindings? The Allflex plates cannot be adjusted for the users weight like a ski binding can so Allflex offers several different choices (for flex and types of use like SL, GS, and freecarving). Beckmann AG: "So I should actually try opiates and related derivatives, before deciding not to use them recreationally?" People without commonsense might benefit from obeying the laws regarding the use of prescription drugs. Seriously though, my "your own actual experience with using that item" comment was (in my opinion) an overdue 'tongue in cheek' response regarding all the negative opinions/comments (over the last several years) about metal boards and/or plate systems that have been made by people who never even tried them. Beckmann AG: "The rest have their origins in, and have seen widespread adoption in skiing." I deliberately did not write 'snowboard' hard boots or 'snowboard' racing because (as you mentioned) there is widespread adoption in (and origins from) skiing / ski racing. However, if we stay 100% focused on snowboarding and what is available right now for alpine snowboarders then one can easily link the BTS and DGSS spring systems to the system from the Northwave race boots (revived as Mountain Slope boots). The UPZ boots and their spring system can be linked to the Burton race boots, and metal board builders should tip their hats to Hans Kessler who applied several race ski innovations to his race boards, which gained notoriety in the 2002 Olympics. Beckmann AG: "The listed 'innovations' may have obvious ties to snowboard racing, but snowboard racing isn't a de facto driver, nor is snowboard racing 'proof' of efficacy." I never said or implied that snowboard racing is a de facto driver or that it is 'proof' of efficacy. My intention was to provide the education/background regarding the history/evolution of the listed 'innovations' and to give credit where credit is due. The question to me was, "And that is suppose to bring more people into alpine snowboarding?" and it was answered. My questions are: 1. Are the innovation naysayers and plate system haters just seeking confirmation of their negative beliefs? 2. Do some people really think snowboard racing / metal boards / plate systems are ruining alpine snowboarding (or ruining their ability to get the recreational snowboard equipment they want, and/or driving away potential alpine snowboarders)? Deja vu

Really? Doesn't that make as much sense as asking if the 7 different Kessler race boards listed in the image below are supposed to bring more people into alpine snowboarding? They are supposed to benefit racers and upper level riders who make the effort to learn how to utilize them. However, people who watch snowboard racers in events like the Olympics might become interested in alpine snowboarding, but you shouldn't expect them to start snowboarding on race (or high end) equipment. If you don't like alpine bindings with lateral flex (a feature from racing) then don't use them. If you don't like hard boots with spring systems (a feature from racing) then don't use them. If you don't like snowboards with metal in them (a feature from racing) then don't use them. If you don't like plate systems (a product from racing) then don't use them. An opinion that is not based on your own actual experience with using that item is basically just a preconceived (prejudice) statement - regardless of how well researched it is. Some non-professionals will appreciate the benefits of technology that is trickled down from the research and development that goes into racing and some will not. As in many other sports, the professionals have different needs than the average consumer.

The spring system looks like the Deeluxe RAB Spring Lean Mechanism The image below shows a RAB spring on a Deeluxe Indy boot.

Yes, yes, yes

No need to say "sorry". That's not what I was trying to change your mind about. It's about your following two comments, 1. "I don't know shit about halfpipe judging, maybe if you land facing one way and then do a quick 180 spin on the ground, that counts as part of your air" 2. "Or was the jump planned to be a 1260? If so then I'd agree it's a perfect run" and, Neil's comment regarding, "I think Jack is right, the first trick was 3.5 rotations in the air and another 1/2 as he landed" Just trying to provide basic halfpipe education so you guys could know why experts (judges, coaches, competitors and announcers) consider it to be a completed 1440 on a run that received a perfect score.

Neil and Jack, I posted two images below (captured from the video Jack posted) that might change your minds. It seems that BuleB focused on the same part of the video I did, and he probably knows it needs to be at least 3.75 rotations for the judges to score it as a 1440. Rotations in the pipe are determined in 180 degree increments, and any rotation that results in at least an additional 90 degrees (before landing) will be credited as 180 degrees. Even though the replay of Shaun's 1440 did not look like 4 complete rotations (in the air) the judges obviously felt he completed the trick. If you focus on the replay (that starts around 1:08) then you will get the wrong impression - that part of the video is from a bad angle (and too far) upslope on the other side of the pipe, so you can't accurately determine where Shaun's board is when it touches the snow. Instead, try to focus on the video at 23-24 seconds - this is where I captured the images. In the first image below (captured at approximately 23 seconds) you can see Shaun is re-entering the pipe and he has completed at least 3.5 rotations. In the second image below (captured at approximately 24 seconds) you can see Shaun is beyond 3.75 rotations (1350 degrees) and his board still has not touched the snow. The red arrow I placed in the second image shows Shaun's direction of rotation, and the distance between the lip of the pipe and the point of the arrow indicates he has rotated at least 1360 degrees.

That was a crazy awesome run, and it was a 1440 (4 rotations - the rotations are relative to a vertical takeoff position). No, you do not have to tell the judges what you're going to do in advance. Some videos show the rider and their coach discussing what tricks to do right before the rider starts their run. Rotations in the halfpipe are determined in 180 degree increments, and any rotation that results in at least an additional 90 degrees (before landing) will be credited as 180 degrees. Example: a 270+ in the air will pass as a 360 (see the video of James Foster below), so a 1350+ in the air will pass as a 1440. This lets the rider maintain more speed and momentum in the pipe - when the rider lands they want to immediately go downward to the next wall at a 30-45 degree angle. If you watch the video below of James Foster doing a 360 you can see his board touching the snow after he spins about 280 degrees (relative to a vertical takeoff position). You can also see a white stripe on his front leg (it's just above his knee). When he lands that white stripe is on his back leg - if the rider goes up the wall heading forward (tip first) then they will land a 360 switch (traveling tail first).