Rob Stevens

When I ride my noboard or skate, my unforced angles (no bindings) are exactly where my feet would be if I was sitting on a chair with them off the ground... around 15 and -5. I'm pretty sure that years of riding a higher angle on my front foot caused it to be more turned out than my back. All the other angles I ride in bindings are a bit different. We all want to watch out for dogma. When I talk of an introductory duck lesson, I'm speaking of development age. Besides, D-sub said earlier that most stand duck naturally, so why fight it? The side benefit is equal proficiency in both directions (for kids)and I wish I had that. By the time you're older, or have been riding diretionally for a few years, it's probably too late. In the last school I ran, we would ask folks to stand relaxed and get an approximate a stance from that. It semed to work pretty well. CASI states, most non-dogmatically, that you can stand however you want, but when you're at rest (straight running) your hips, torso and shoulders will likely want to be somwhere in the middle of your "splay" (I like that one). The limits of your controlled rotation will generally occur between the angles of your front and back foot. Uncontrolled rotation is another matter entirely. I'd like to say that I an stoked with you people and I want to ride with all of you at some point.

Nothing you say here suggests that this is not the case... in fact, you support my argument. My dad is a CPGA professional and has had to change his swing mechanics over the years to compensate for his assymmetry. The fact that you don't want to ride that way is neither here nor there... it's just personal preference. I like my stance duck (35 and -5) and think it works well. I wouldn't go back to 0 or higher (freeride anyway) and I wouldn't say I have an "awkward" style. It just works in the context of that type of riding, with turning and jumping being equally important. I rarely use words like "all". This says that what works for one works for everybody. As an instructor I know this isn't the case. I do stand by the belief that kids should be taught to ride in both directions and that it would be more balanced, development-wise, to stand on the board like most stand on the ground... slightly toes out. That being said, I'm the President of CASI and not on the Technical Committee, so what I say about how we teach, now or in the future, doesn't mean s#!t. The truth is, once you've gone past lessons, you can set up however you want, in whatever way makes you happiest and gives you the type of performance you're looking for. You may even wind up on a Skwall, duckfooted.

I guess I tend to be surrounded by 100+ day types, who have been at it for years, though I suspect you're right about the "normal" rider who gets out maybe 10 times a season. In that context, there should be no way to blow yourself up... cumulatively, that is. I still think that teaching someone to ride in both directions at the start could oly help them.

Directional riding is absolutely going to give you an assymetrical physique. Think of how you stand on your board when you only ride one way and the muscular and skeletal requirements and adjustments that arise from that. A good way to know you're doing something unbalanced to your body when riding left or right foot forward exclusively, is to think about how your back leg felt after your last pow day. This has to have an overall phisiological effect over time. Moreso if you ride alot. As proof of this, most of the 3rd generation snowboarders around here, people who grew up snowboarding from a very young age, but before switch riding was anything more than an emergency manouever, are some pretty stiff and twisted late 20s, early 30somethings. In CASI, we've batted around the idea of setting up all development-age riders dead-equal duck and introducing left and right foot-forward turns to them at the same time. The goal being to create equal proficiency in both directions and hopefully eliminate the "Crooked stick" phenomenon. We'll see where that goes...

I have been talking to Brett and he is hoping to teach / coach up there this season. If that turns out to be the case, he'll likely be tapped as one of the coaches. He is a dedicated alpine rider from the day and would be an amazing instructor, if you got him. His entertainment value alone would be worth the price of admission.

Pow; Where do I get a look at those Phiokkas? I want a binder that sits low, like the Burtons.

This may jog some memories: Bruno gouvy in his Marlboro red and white, strapping into a bullet-shaped nacelle and jumping out of a plane over the Alps, looking for that special rush only breaking a freefall speed record can provide. I will sidetrack this thread no more.

2 more reasons not to use snowshoes: -The skiers that put in the track will be pissed at your "modifications" to it. -Traversing sidehill with something wider than your foot is lame. I cross carry my approach skis so I don't get hit in the back of the head by them. The Dakine Helipro or Helipro II have this feature and it's excellent. I don't do high alpine, but it seems that eliminating plastic from your back or frontcountry experience could save alot of aggro. By the way, the guy who dissappeared on Everest was Bruno Gouvy.

Carp; Go to a Burton dealer and have them mount up some C60's with their new Vibram soled Moto (I think that's the model). The ankle is reasonably stiff, but it's the sole of the boot that will eliminate foot pain because you won't have to crank the instep strap as much to keep your heel down. Edging forces are also supported by the shank, rather than you having to stiffen your arch. I guess you could retrofit a plastic tongue of some kind under the laces if you found the forward lean wasn't supportive enough. Modern "spoilers" or backstays seem to hold up and not crease as much as they used to. Burton was a big offender in this regard, with ThirtyTwo being the best for overall long-term durability, in my opinion anyway. If your knees can handle it, I would also give a bit of duck a try (in the -5 range or so), with a higher than average (for soft) front angle to aid steering. My angles are around 30 to 35 and 0 to -5. This is a very comfortable stance for me that allows strong carving and amazing absorbtion.

I like the political undertones... it gives you a bit of an idea about the personalities of the people here. ... that, and the tireless rants. HB- 55 and 50 or lower, depending on the width, set as wide as they'll go. (alpine boards aren't usually drilled for wider stances... though if anyone knows about a non-custom alpine with a larger stance allowance, let me know) SB- 35 and -5. I love duck. 22 inches. Carbon or aluminum only. Since I turned my back knee out, I have been able to compress much lower to the ground, increasing my legs "travel" for landings and overall mobility. The heelside turns got a bit "blocked out" for awhile, but the toesides were just as good as ever. If I had my way, I would never wear bindings of any kind. Strictly heli drops on the Noboard.

We used to have a lot of fun on boards with no highbacks and velcro straps, but I wouldn't be that into it now if I had to give up my Burton C's. To compliment the feeling of stiffness under the foot, I may try Burtons vibram soled boot this year. It still has a reasonably soft ankle, which should still allow you to feather the edge. My old Koflach Hunters (ice climbing double boot w/ soft ankle) really used to make up for flexy baseplates with their rigid soles... could both be what we've been waiting for? I thought the P1 was a good binder, but had too many fiddles on it... I prefer to set it and forget it, so things like quick release forward lean scare me a bit. The one gripe I have about Burton bindings of any kind are the fat heel loops on their baseplates. They tend to drag in the snow at higher heelside edge angles. A good trade off is the Bent Metal Carbon (from Mervin). The high, flat heel loop provides lots of heelside edge angle and may allow the elusive "duckfoot EC" on a frontside turn. I'm still working on the abdominals that might get me there. On the primitive side of things, if you hate foot pain and ride alot of pow, you must Noboard. A question about your all aluminum soft bindings (Catek)... how heavy are they compared to the carbon Burtons? if they're much heavier, I would go with the light choice.

Those are my favourite shred movies of all time. The football-inspired s#!t was brilliant... the rugby game down the moguls on monoskis was the most violent thing I've ever seen. Of course the swallowtail segments were unreal too... BIG speed... Yeah, Regis. By the way, Nils... I'll get you that noboard clip this season and send you a link to the full DVD when It's released. Our first screening is at the Banff Film Festivals "Radical Reels" night, at the end of the month. Stoked.

I got loaded at Cittas in Whisler and left my F2 on the pub's rack outside all night. When I woke up the next day, I thought for sure it would be gone. Not so strangely, it was still there with a scrawled note on it reading: "We didn't want your s#!t monoski. Lucky you. Enjoy the pow, Submariner". I did feel lucky, but kind of alone, too. By the way... that Oxygen you're talking about sounds like a Dangerous. They were around 170, all silver, with a 18 waist. The year before, they had a doberman on the tail. I used to ride for them and that was the funnest board they ever gave me... That and this purple KR72 that I wish I still had.

You should put an asterisk beside your screen name there VonRipping-onlyintheprescribedmanner-ton. I thought the purpose of this site was talking about snowboarding? I'm sure some of these swallowtails and longboards are going to be set up with soft boots, too. Is this too far out of line? If you had any idea how good no binding riding is in pow, you wouldn't be s#!tting on it. If you want to beat up on another way of sliding down the mountain, maybe you should go back to the Soviet Union... Oh wait... they're toast and their special brand of oppression along with them. This is probably fuel for another thread... definitely no need to speak on it here again. I do want one of those sweeeeet woodies myself... I only have a morning one right now.

If you got on the stomp pad thing from my comment on the noboard pad, you should all look at trying your big boards with NO BINDINGS. This stomp pad talk is strange... who cares if you cover a bit of your graphics... at least you'll be able to hang on the traverses, as Bordy points out. The noboard pad replaces the bindings, but if you don't want to commit like that, put a stomp pad behind each binding and stand on them with both feet out for good times. Bring a leg rope, or you'll be walking home.

Moa; Those inserts I bought were sourced from Wintersteiger. They come with the p-tex already on. You can get the counter-sinking bit from them too. Go that route and you won't have to worry about getting your depth wrong or having "afterthought" p-tex not bond to the bare metal of the t-nut. Otherwise, the operation was pretty straightforward... I took a 4 hole disk, attached it to the back 2 holes and used the empty space as a guide for where to strike with my awl. Once the pilot point was marked, I just drilled away. The bit provided goes to flat when you reach the prescribed depth, so it's tough to mess it up. I did get a friend to eyeball my straightness over the drill and that saved me from going in crooked... I thought I was straight, but I was a bit off. Good luck and don't blow it.

Go to www.noboard.ca and throw a pad at it for those mad deep days.

Where was that pic taken?

Where you quote me, I'm referring to soft boots. I still maintain that you have to think about the whole foot / ankle activation thing on a "cost vs. benefit" basis in hard boots. If you're in really stiff boots, you may be using more force than is required to hold the edge and in some situations (icy death chatter) flexing / stiffening may be to your disadvantage. Isn't that a large part of the reasons you'd roll stiff boots to begin with? To releive your bones of the job of holding an edge? I would like to hook up with you Phil. You should come my way, though (mountains, not hills). The tech heads who work for us here at CASI would be stoked to have a brain like yours to pick. Of course, we'd have to go noboarding... then we could see how you'll use every bit of you to keep it together.

Fair enough on the price... they're not cheap. I have a pretty big head, too and the XL / XXL fits great. "If you have the means, I highly recommend one." (Ferris Buehler on Ferraris, also)

The Troy Lee D2 is much like an MX helmet, but slimmer and lighter. It also has no venting to speak of, so it is nothing like most other bike helmets. The tradeoff is that they can be pretty hot in the summer. I have worn them from +30 to -30 very comfortably, probably more so in the winter.

When I get Jack and Phil calling me out, I better start dancing. Once again, to keep it simple, The stiffer your boots are, the less Lifting and Pointing are going to effect the shape of your shell. A simple experiment to see if you're getting any edge angle from L & P is to ride straight and isolate those 2 movements to see if you can create a turn (no cheating... ie: using your COM, shins or knees). I would say (as I did in my last post) that you'll likely get something on the toes because you can get the boot to hold its shape by "firming" up in your ankle through Pointing, even if your boot is very stiff. On the heelside, your ability to effect the shell shape in any meaningful way is, once again, a function of the stiffness of the boot... much more so than on your toes. What you might find is the amount of force you'd use, vs the amount of movement you'd get might make you rethink how much you're working your feet inside the boots. Relaxed feet and medium effort ankle activation may result in strong riding, with less fatigue. This is not only of benefit for freecarvers who want to ride all day without cramping, but also racers, who need to do multiple heats in an afternoon. All of this is totally different in soft boots, where L & P can have a large steering effect. I still try to eliminate activating my foot past the balls of my toes on toeside turns. I'll just try to stand on them through ankle and forefoot activation, rather than get on "Pointe" like a ballet dancer. The same can be said for heelside, where I'll lift the forefoot, but not lift my toes up. Just try it sitting there... you can get the same amount of movement with less muscles working. Another variable is the quality of your boots / binders. See my last post for that one. My bodies "activation zone", when I'm riding my best seems to be from the balls of my feet back and up to the bottom of my ribcage. Above that point, I feel like I'm tensing for no good reason. Upper body stability and direction change doesn't require any extra firing of the muscles, unless you're performing a recovery move.

Like No 2 said, the 661 armour is fairly cheap, compared to Dianese. It also fits much better (or at least more predictably) than the Italian armour. If you order a Large Dainese, be prepared for a shock when you can't get your little brother into it. Other than Dainese and 661, there are many other choices... Beastgear, Hoots, ect. For close contact s#!t like SBX, get yourself an MX neckroll. No sense in bleeding out after taking an edge across the neck. The other stuff like knee-shin guards, ass pants and full face helmets make you look huge and imposing, which is cool. I wear the full face all the time (Troy Lee Designs, for that Palmer-in-all-his-glory look), the Dainese knee-shin combo fits very well with my boots and has saved me from s#!t just under the surface more than a few times.

You can order inserts with flared structure (a reallt beefy t-nut) which also has ptex bonded to the bottom. A special drill bit is used to counter sink the hole so the flared insert sits perfectly flush with the base. I bought a Salomon Fastback 74 on clearout which had a rediculously narrow 20 inch max stance. I added 4 more to the back end (powder board), have had no trouble and I have been watching for movement... nothing. I'm also 6'1'', 220 lbs so if I don't pull them out, it shouldn't happen to anyone else, short of pros on 100 footers and hackers ragging through the rocks.