Rob Stevens

Hey James. Some great stuff in there. I really like “Finishiation”… an excellent way to simply describe the continuous nature of connected turns, when you never really “finish” until you stop. Otherwise, I’d say that what you’re on to isn’t so much a “lost art”… it’s really more about taking known principles to their limit. A couple of things I’d take exception to… a zero degree or slightly negative back foot wouldn’t preclude carving on steeps in a speed controlled and “stylish” manner. The ability to mimic the angle of your front foot, or to be even more “open” to your direction of travel is more a function of hip, knee and ankle mobility. I’m at about -3 which has the inside of my binding at 0, but have no trouble being open. Very mobile pals of mine ride rather shocking rearward angles, carve steeps, but have excellent flexibility allowing that to happen. I’d also say that what’s shown as “slarving” is actually the very basic “linked side-slip”. A true sliding carve is as difficult to master as pencil line carving. A commenter here once described slarving as akin to WRC style driving, where carving is more like F1… Intentional drifting to steer, as opposed to that being very limited (but not absent… especially if your tires are “going away”). Lastly, my pal Lars at Stranda snowboards is a carver in the vein of James. Both however are spider men and climbers in the 150 lb “fully dressed” category. Certain techniques need to be modified for the “Clydesdale’s” like myself… particularly around the need to combine down unweighted finishes with the initiation and apex execution done in up unweighting.

This, being “the above”. So yeah… there’s an argument to be made about having to look before “every” turn. It’s only when I stop making that effort (and it is an effort, but that’s what we take on when we ride something so asymmetrical) that this kind of thing happens. It’s also in situations like this that precedent is set. While you might argue that the FIS guideline speaks to turning uphill, if it can be shown that the traversing was as or more dangerous (you could argue that once turned uphill, you might now actually spot someone and be able to avoid them), the “code” may be found to not address the reality. Hey… just sayin’

If your observation on the above is the following, you may have just lost the case.

So you get 4… If it’s argued you can’t or didn’t look uphill, then you may have a problem. With 1, it’s tied to 4… it could be argued that you couldn’t avoid people because you couldn’t or didn’t look uphill. Again, I’m not saying the uphill skier would absolutely win the decision, but if I as the defence lawyer had that video and the defendant had the time and money, you might wind up defending yourself at great cost in both money and time.

If you’re plainly disregarding 1 and 4…

One day, someone in a heelside turn who can really arc, but either isn’t looking or gets caught by surprise, will get cleaned up like either all of us have had done, of come really close to being. In the aftermath, the wrecked party will sue the uphill skier. If the uphill skier has a knowledgeable lawyer, they may have a challenge to make against a law that in this case might have more nuance than the law has previously had applied. Our ability to cover an unheard of amount of lateral distance, combined with our blind spot, might make for an interesting case. I doubt it’s a win for the uphill skier, but there’s a case in there which at the least, will make lawyers some $. Ride on swivel my Friends! Being in the right doesn’t get you your body and mind back if you get destroyed.

Ya Jimmy.

With all my talk, I’ve still been almost nuked twice this year.

This won’t be a popular take, but that’s a decent example of “shared responsibility”. If you don’t know that after 2 turns someone pinning it in the fall line will catch up to you, you need to increase your alert level. I can see why he might have thought that was your fault… he was on edge, watching you and trying to steer away. If you had eyes in the back of your head, you would have seen him. My answer is to grow eyes there, rather than have him act for both of you. If you don’t know what’s behind you every time you go to the heel edge, you’re asking for it.

I don’t get spoon noses.

It’s easier if it’s not cambered. You don’t need a rope… pretend you’re snowboarding and steer with opening and closing your torso at the same time as your knees and ankles follow that movement. I have Instagram?

Been having great days in the Bow Valley bubble.

The Asmo is a very fun profile when snow is good and run outs are soft packed. If you’re running straight and more or less carving, the rail really hooks up and can make it very controlled on cat tracks. If you have to side slip, it’s a bear… the channel makes the board want to lift out of the snow like the flap on an aircraft wing would. So for pivoting around, I like the flat base. As for heli, if the snow is right and I can keep it on the ground, I can go pretty much anywhere. With the rope on a noboard, you can deal with just about any scenario.

Make yourself a home made short tail or swallow tail. Taking length off will create taper as well. Any popsicle stick freestyle board will do… if it’s not too old, you can avoid full camber profiles. For traction, a mountain bike tire with the bead and sidewall cut off can be glued on where you’d put your feet. Around where the inserts are will do.

@lamby I’ve got a pretty big collection going. 4 B fishes. One of which is a NoFish from when our NoBoard co. partnered with Burton. That’s Greg Todds’ pro model, we like to say. 6 Asmo’s. One of which is a 170 Wolle and Steve made me with my name on it and everything! A Grassroots I got from Jeremy Jensen when he came up to Canada a few years ago to take part in a story I wrote for Snowboard Canada. A Shark. I’d like to get one of Tim’s new ones with the fins. A Yes Clark I cut into an asymmetric swallowtail. I helped Alex Warburton from Yes with the Clark project. I also have a Yes 420 which I cut taper into. 4 cms of width off the tail… I call it the YesNo, or the “380”. I had a Burton Resonator which was one of my favourites ever. I gave it to @dredman and the cause at Turner last year. I think @b0ardski got it. I’d like to get another… just so easy to ride, that one I still prefer snowboards over purpose built “pow surfers” for more challenging conditions. The flat base can be more predictable than profiled ones. Regardless, short tailed boards are the easiest to ride, as you can brake by pushing the tail straight down instead of having to pivot, but a full length tail in ideal conditions can really let you power turn. If the conditions are blower, I’ll ride the big Asmo. The nose on it is massive… you can push as hard as you want on the front foot and it won’t sub. I’m on the program with Stranda the last few years and will set up one of their “Tree Surfers” as a noboard this year. For boots, Sorel Caribou’s are what I’ve used for most of those years, but have switched back into snowboard boots for more ankle support. Mostly, we snowmobile in the zones we ride. I’ve thought of getting a split setup, which I can ski, snowboard and noboard on, but haven’t done that yet. We also have a small cat skiing operation and I’ll sometimes lead groups on it. I’ve also been lucky enough to fly some 100’s of thousands of feet with CMH and Eagle Pass. The former doesn’t allow it anymore (a few people wound up being “that guy”, so I think they just made a rule), but the latter will still do it if the group is right. It sure has helped my snowboarding. Going back into bindings after getting pressure control dialed on a noboard makes it pretty easy by comparison. I’m really thankful I was introduced to it when I was in my early 30’s, as the terrible shapes and steep learning curve are best dealt with when you’re younger… I’m careful to pick my days now, where it really has to be perfect. That’s how I feel with it, as we ride in “regular” terrain. It is however, very fun in a foot of snow on mellow, golf course type environments. you should NoBoard

20 years deep for me this season.

It was said elsewhere that 90 degrees of edge angle is vanishingly rare to generate. To @dhamann’s point, having your setup in an ever so slightly overhanging position will give you greater edge control in a “normal” flex softboot. It’s a fact that if you have underhang, you need a stiffer boot to overcome the decreased leverage you’d have. My boots are ever so slightly longer than my board is wide, but my toes and heels themselves are bang on the edges. Even then, I can generate enough edge angle to do speed controlling carved turns. To the point @crackaddict can? No… he carves where others slide, but he changes boards to freeride, so nyahhh nanaa.

All fair points. I came back to the boards I ride now after some years on hardboots, so knew how to manage the gear and expectations. Good talk… good talk.

Anyone “working” on carving will be better off on the 8m. It simply doesn’t take as much speed or edge angle to get it to ride rail to rail. I’d also add that my daily driver is an 8.5 m, has been referred to by some here as a “pow board” and will leave trenches most could not buy their way to making, even if money and manufacturer were no object. Technique is 80% of the overall performance. When you have that, a custom board and the fitness, you can be Crackaddict. When you have that, a very nice but still more “typical” board and the fitness, you can be me.

To the first part, you’re making my case for me. A basic board is easy to carve. It’s only harder for an expert to carve it because it doesn’t want to perform at the HIGH end of the envelope. to the second part, you’re again supporting my point. The custom carver is the board that required expert skills to get it to work. Anything less than expert skills is “rewarded” with a less than ideal experience. To you last point and again supported by both of us, my response is “yes”.

It definitely ties the room together.

The market is perfectly balanced for its needs. Most of the boards made are for beginners and intermediates. Advanced riders have lots of choices too… they just have to educate themselves. ultimately however, it’s down to you and your skills… there are a lot of people who are focused on equipment as being the lacking element when it’s clearly themselves. These people are far better off seeking out internal improvements, then external ones.

Stiff bindings with standard flex softboots is a nice combo. The responsiveness is in the power transfer the bindings give you and the flexibility for powder is provided by the boots. For carving on hardpack, you’ll have to hold your ankles in place with internal force rather than external plastic, but you’ll have the flexibility to ride powder properly. Drake Podium FF and some well broken in Vans that were never really that stiff even out of the box are my setup. With the boots, I will say that the back stay / “spoiler” has maintained its forward lean.

And then the toeside after that and the heelside after that.

When did you see Ryan coming out of the trees? I say this with no malice as he’s a very warm in his approach and not afraid to give an honest assessment of his abilities and limitations, in the chats I had with him. Certainly, he was open about how he felt that the terrain at Turner was over his head and that he really preferred lower angle, open slopes to do his thing. My response was that his equipment was rather specialized. The exchange left me wondering if he was sacrificing his own personal enjoyment to focus on a part of his riding that receives the greatest acclaim? I think so, but believe that this acclaim brings him as much or more joy than supposed “mastery” of anything he might be confronted with. In that way, he’s not sacrificing anything at all and he’s doing exactly what he likes. For the rest of us, I suppose it only means more trips back to the car if you never want to be caught on the “wrong” board. Personally, I can’t be f#€ked with that, so a “one board to rule them all” is my go to. Being in a spot on the mountain where I’d say “I don’t want to (or worse, can’t) go there” because my board was too purpose specific is a place I’ve been and have no interest in going back to. I suppose in a way it’s like Ryan’s approach… he’d like to look good at all times.