johnasmo

Some WTF video only garnered two views from the WTF thread. Not produced enough to raise to the "worth watching" tread, but linking the tread here as stoke for those coming to Whitefish before the MCC event. Typical Whitefish fog, but honest, this weekend (Jan 28, 29) was bluebird! (though sub-zero) Can't vouch for Turner, but Whitefish has good chalky hardpack right now and a week of cool temperatures to preserve it through the weekend. Who's stopping at Whitefish?

Narrow for carving groomers, wide for surfing pow. I don't bother with anything in between; two different sports. Personally, I like 18 or 19 cm. 20 cm is max for me, and I'm mondo 28.5. If your angles are less than 60/55 consider giving narrower a try. Narrower boards have less leverage against your legs; they make carving feel smooth an effortless compared to wide boards. More comfort, more fun.

GoPro video from Wednesday.

He sourced some more T3 from someone's stock, so now I think he has more T3 on hand than T4. Nevertheless, this prototype is helping sort out how to compensate the layups for the T4 future. This one uses about 30 percent less carbon and glass by weight and a slightly less stiff core to start, but comes within a point of stiffness on the Bruce scale of its T3 counterpart. The ride is awesome. It's a little smoother carving through push piles, but there's a little more feedback carving over groomed-in bumps dips and irregularities that are frozen in place. I think its from the torsional stiffness of the T4 making for a slightly stiffer front suspension. Remains unflappable though and edge hold is fantastic.

To me, they're two different sports entirely. Hardboot carving, narrow board, firm groomers is one physical activity. Softboot surfing, wide board, sideways stance, off piste is a different physical activity entirely. Narrow versus wide is what makes these experiences so different. Hard or soft boots is just what you put on your feet, BUT softboots on narrow just doesn't work well, and hardboots on wide (often) doesn't leave enough freedom of motion. So I just go to the car and choose which sport I want to play based on snow conditions, then change footwear accordingly.

Sneak Peek, top terminal. Was going to film the lift line, but GoPro batteries didn't like the cold. The strange Mountain flag flying at the end is a 10th Mountain Division Flag. Whitefish Ski Museum just added an exhibit. https://flatheadbeacon.com/2022/08/31/whitefish-ski-museum-unveils-10th-mountain-division-exhibit/

Do you have a date on that picture? I know Bruce made Mark a softie board he called a Slice earlier than 2020, pre-Contra, as that was the "freeride" build he was talking about replacing in 2020 after Mark tore out an edge on this "Slice" model. I believe Slice referred to slots cut in the titanal meant to relax torsional stiffness.

Good luck Neil. Elective surgery can be a tough choice to make, but some conditions just aren't going to fix themselves with wishful thinking. I have chronic hip issue, but I'm choosing to believe it is SI joint for now. The orthos haven't concluded otherwise, so I'm not technically in denial yet. Besides, I've got something else to deal with in the short term. This happened a month ago downhill mountain biking at Whitefish Mountain Resort. Took a hit to the shoulder. Shoulder armor saved the humerus, but the force still had to go somewhere so it took out my scapula this time. That's a new one for me; I thought I dislocated the shoulder and cracked a rib or two, but it was really the scapula. Got a MRI of the shoulder since then, but the doctor is on vacation so no word yet on rotator cuff damage. Either way, I'm confident I'll be back on snow before the MCC.

Wow, that's a good season. Best I ever managed in MT is 164, but 45 of those required skinning. Only made it to 142 this season with 26 skinning. But I did log 3.6 million vert, which is more than the 164 year. Been in Minnesota for two weeks now and don't expect to skin when I get back there. Sticking a fork in it.

I'd have thought that would make the choice clear. An Angrry is a sub nine SCR. Seems like that alone should make it feel snappy enough. The CFR soft boot boards in that range seem to be killing it.

I agree with the initial assessments of of @SunSurferand @Jack M. Rodeo arm emerges unconsciously from quickly trying to rotate the hips and torso to be aligned where you want them to if they fall behind after quick transitions of the board into the next carve. Usually it happens toe to heel because the torso often open sideways more in toe-side turn. Sever rodeo arm is when you actually use it to help swing the torso; mild rodeo arm is just the arm lagging behind to not slow down the rotation. Using upper body and arms as counterweight to assist in swinging the lower body around is technique, not always bad form. I use it consciously in powder and trees to assist in repositioning the board. Carved turns shouldn't require a lot of forced board swinging, but sometimes still. I notice myself do it when things get heated. It's not good form, but it's not bad form either unless it's happening on every turn. If it happens all the time, analyze why your upper body timing is off. But if you lock your arms in place because you think it's bad form, you're just leaving a compensatory technique on the table when you might need it.

Nice shoutouts to Winterstick and Sugarloaf.

Since these graphs are of radius over length, a single SCR will be a horizontal line of constant radius. For an apples to apples comparison, lets compare shapes against a stock Kessler 180 GS. From the published numbers I have on it, 11.5-19m, 17.2m avg, 18mm taper, 70mm setback, the shape I calculate that it has is 11.5-19-17.5 as shown in the below comparison graph. I don't think the K boards are a pair of clothoid curves because the averages and tapers don't work out that way. But for comparison, I've included a 12-21-14 GS using clothoid transitions, and both Contra KK and Contra AC shapes. All of them modeled to have 1670mm effective edge and 20.28mm sidecut depth which corresponds to a 17.2m radial SCR. So, apples-to-apples. 180 x 17.2m sidecut comparison What I like to look at is how these shapes differ from radial. It is my belief that differences between sidecut induced flex and the shape of the carve in the snow affect pressure distribution along the base. Sidecut induced flex is highly affected by core flex and snow compaction, but sidecut profile plays a role. The board would like to form a certain flexed shape, but it must follow the path in the snow instead. Different parts of the base will be bearing different loads in order to make that happen. 180 x 17.2m radial diff comparison In the above graph, you can see that the among these boards the Contra AC differs the least from radial and the Kessler GS differs the most. The K180 can reasonably be expected to require more weight shift to keep weight were traction is being demanded. The Contra AC can reasonably be expected to ride more like a radial all-mountain than a race board. My spring slush riding certainly bears that out, yet it seems equally happy aggressively free-carving hardpack.

Naw, this year's guy only did 6.8 million. They guy who won in 2016 did over 8 million. The resort does the tracking, and our season is around 120 days. The 8 million dude didn't even know there was a vertical list until after Christmas, so he must have been averaging over 70K a day after he decided to go for it. Kudo to Myles. No disrespect intended to the rider (who looks like he was on a Winterstick!). 100K is a big accomplishment, not the least of which is arranging for Guinness to record it as a world record. I was taking a jab at Guinness. The linked article even points out the guy who did 180K in 12 in 2018, but did not "qualify" as a world record. And for years their record was 62K, which clearly was being surpassed dozens or hundreds of times a year at resorts all over the world that track their passholder's vertical. So the issue with Guinness is that they are in the business of being an authority for records, but don't seem very concerned with whether those records reflect superlative feats in the first place. I sound like a nutter for caring. I should just be happy for Myles.

Sorry, Guiness, not that impressive for 12 hours. Maybe out east, but not in the west. For example, the guy that topped our vertical list at Whitefish this year did at least 8 days over 100,000 and many more over 90,000 on the Fridays and Saturdays that were open for night skiing, allowing 11.5 hours of vertical tracking. Vertical leaders often do around 70K just in the 9AM - 4PM hours that are not night skiing. Once the night skiing included a detached lift, people going for their vertical can routinely top 100K out here. Heck, I remember a personal best of 98K (on a snowboard) even back in '07 when it only had a fixed grip double for night skiing. And yes, doing that kind of vertical means dedicated lapping and not much turning. Respectable yes, but boring too.

Here's another nostalgic graph from two years ago: Contras Spring 2020 Seeing them all together lets you see how the apex of the curvatures was shifted outward based on how tight the radius was. It also gives some idea of how many different Contra programs we generated by that time. Some of the outliers on there are noteworthy, like @crackaddict's 194 x 19m alpine board, or the 165 x 16 SB, whose effective edge I then fit into a NC program from JJA to make James' TCX 166 x 16m (because Bruce can't press wider than 30cm at widest point, but JJA can). Bruce and I don't know if JJA actually used the program we sent, or went with his own sidecut design in the end, but that's the kind of stuff what was happening two years ago. I never knew who ordered the 182 x 17.5m; anything over a 14m seemed exorbitant to me. Chester ordered a Contra KK 187 x 17.5m this year, but no feedback yet as I don't think he got a chance to ride it before knee surgery sidelined his season. So there you have it, full transparency on Contra sidecuts. Anyone can measure them physically, so why pretend they're trade secrets, eh? Better to have free and open discussions about them and decide what you want to try next. Even if you can't get on Bruce's build list, Donek and Winterstick do it all by CNC too. P.S. James, I think Bruce may have used the Contra BX 11.9m shown in previous post on your 2022 169 Contra CFR 29 x 12m. He treats the BX/FR/SB programs sort of interchangeably under the CFR heading. In practice, they're only subtly different from one another.

Adding links to graphs... Contra BX shape Contra FR shape Contra SB vs. SB2 Contra AC vs SB2

Sometimes there is no difference. I made so many of the original alpine Contra (V4) programs in different lengths and radii that some were used on softboot carvers. If you ordered a softboot carver, with the emphasis on "carver", it's likely the same shape as for hardboots. All you get is a much wider board and a wider stance. If you ordered a boardercross or freeride oriented board, however, then they differ. Where the alpine Contra sweet spot is being tilted high on edge, BX and FR riders aren't going to be laying out EC-like turns as much as professed softboot "carvers" pursue that. Bruce had been doing progressive 11-13m for BX. When I analyzed the CNC program, though, it was clear the sign making software didn't do what he intended. I scaled a fairly wide looking version of a 14-11-12-11-14 Contra shape to 11.9m radius and mixed it 50/50 with a 11-13 clothoid progression to make the first Contra BX shape. Target radius was 11.9m because that is the depth equivalent of a clothoid 11-13. Also created a Contra BX 10.9m program. The Contra BX programs were in early 2020. The first mention of "freeride" was when Bruce said Mark Fawcett wanted a new "freeride" board. I don't think he ever ended up making it for Mark, but I designed that shape to be less progressive than the BX and with more radius differential, but still have the tighter radii spread wider into the tip and tail like on the BX. Around that time I also mixed the alpine and BX Contras 50/50 to make a specialized SB for softboot carving. And then with a hookier tail it became the SB2. I think Bruce marks these as CFR on the sidewall. Turns out the SB2 and the alpine AC are actually very close to one another. Funny how that worked out. Incremental refinement to alpine and softboot shapes arriving at a similar place.

We're always balanced against the same amount of gravity. Getting lower means either turning sharper or going faster. Steeper terrain makes speed available, but lets you control it by turning sharper. So ironically, to avoid going dangerously faster, you have to seek out steeper runs. I just hope to be walking without a cane at 75. The way I feel when I stand up from my computer doesn't bode well. Turning gates and winning races tells me you're doing just fine. Don't injure out in pursuit of somebody else's style, refine your own day-by-day through self-analysis.

@pow4everThanks for posting the image. They are all 12.5m, the 12 on the Contra V4 is just a typo in the legend. The higher radius across the middle is why we suggest downsizing the radius you ask for. These will only turn like a 12.5 when tilted high, else they will cruise longer, like a 13+ as you weight mostly the center. Shorter radius with longer board works fine with the Contra shape since the pressure distribution remains closer to the bindings (Hello Rad-Air?).

Yeah, I was using a bit of hyperbole to make the point. Folllow cam-ing a carver makes your point. I know how hard it is to keep my chin pointed down the fall line with a GoPro and still stack matching carves above another carver. Head isn't looking into the carve, shoulders fall behind too, BUT as long as I keep concentrating on lower body (knees and hips), I can generally pull it off. Stacking is the only way to get close enough shots and not have the background swinging wildly back and forth in the shot.

Hell yeah! That could be the start of a "Hardboot Carving worth watching" thread. Screw that other thread. This is what I aspire to -- steep, fast, nothing but net. Kill the audio and play it at quarter speed; all the tutorial you need.

P.S. P.S. Another plug for the MCC clinics. I got serious about thinking about tilt and center of gravity stuff and how to manipulate them after the gates clinic at the MCC in February. I've made progress in my carving since the MCC. For example, why keep your shoulders parallel to the snow? Why not reach for the snow? Because trying to keep your shoulders level while tilting the board high on edge brings your center of gravity further to the high side of the board perpendicular. That makes the board tilt on which you are balanced want to slide to the bottom of the trench, not out of it. Duh.

P.S. Back mobility doesn't need to hold you back. I've got old-man back, L5/S1 and L4/L5 and SI joint issues. I rode with a Sparthos Back Brace all winter. Riding is better for my back than sitting at the computer. Getting your center of gravity lower shouldn't involve breaking at the waist and flexing your lower back. It doesn't even need to involve much spinal rotation unless you're going for chest-on-the snow EC carves. You should be able to carve while maintaining good back posture. What it takes is bending your knees. Dropping your butt lower and using your femurs like rudders to drive your knees toward the snow from a position above the knees, to the *high* side of the perpendicular with the board edge if possible. That's why higher binding angles and narrower boards make carving easier. The expression should only be "drive your knees", not "drive with your knees". Driving your knees toward the snow is what puts the board tilt higher than the angle balancing your CG. You drive your knees by... wait for it... bending your knees to drop your butt and rotating your hip into the turn. It's all about the hips. Sort out the lower body and upper body (including spine) is just style points.

Hips. Hips. Hips. It's all about the hips. That's my 2 cents, but I'll elaborate. All the physics of carving cares about is you center of gravity/mass and how your feet are positioning the board relative to it as you balance on the edge. Imagine your CG and bindings forming a triangle and each foot of the triangle as a shoe that can be inclined plus, minus, or perpendicular to the line from its edge your CG. Perpendicular works. Being at a sharper angle with the snow than the angle balancing your GC works to stay in trench. Being at a lower angle with the snow than the angle balancing your CG slides out of the trench. Your inputs control the angle with the snow at each binding. I.e., the tilt at the front and rear of the board are controlled separately. The position of your hips, fore/aft, rotationally, and angulation relative to board, are the key to *everything*. Well, maybe *everything* is an exaggeration, where your looking, or where your hands, arms, or shoulders are is practically irrelevant compared to how and where you've positioned your hips. I used to say, "steer with your d**k." Now I have another way to think about it. Pretend you are trying to pee on the snow without getting your pants wet. Every turn. Pee, pee, pee, repeat it like a mantra. If your hips go the other way, your rear knee takes edge angle away from the tail and it will slide out. If you get your hips ahead of turn, you don't need to twist upper torso much beyond any additional angulation you can to further *raise* your CG relative to the edge tilt you are balancing on. Simple, no? Don't stop at parallel to your boots if you're going to keep twisting and reaching with your upper body beyond that. If anything, leave upper body static and relaxed over hips and twist hips until things work. In practice, you'll barely have to lead the turn at all, but leading is *way* better than trailing the turn. It's because of the inputs each foot ends up putting into the board tilt. There's evidence in your video that your hip bone (connected to you knee bone) is trailing the on the heal side turns.