jtslalom Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 It seems that after watching the qualifying rounds to the X-games boarder cross, no hard riders made it into the finals. Chris Klug himself did not make it far. There was some French guy who made it through some of the rounds only to bite it hard in the semi finals. Just goes to show you boys, don't throw away those soft boards. It helps to get on them from time to time! I will be riding at Mountain Creek tonight over on Devils Bit and/or Zero-G. Hope to see some other hardbooters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dragonfly jones Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Hard booters slumming in softies WIN X GOLD! (so they weren't riding them today, check them and know them) Kestenholz is a hard booter - see 2002 Olympics/Retired WC Star Wescott - Former Hard booter, now brdrX master DelaRue - hard booted around France and Europe Jason Hale - Hard booter Jeff Greenwood Hardbooter Klug - hardbooter Yes, yes they were not riding hard boots - It is my belief that at the end of the end the fastest guys who take home checks will have been HARDBOOTERS - even if they gave it up to make $$$ in Cross or Freedogging. The roots don't lie unlike your "blonde" ex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Todd Stewart Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 it all depends on the course, a lot of the non-fis boarder crosses i've seen on tv are better for softies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dragonfly jones Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 okay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirror70 Posted January 26, 2004 Report Share Posted January 26, 2004 Xavier DeLaRue won the Vans Triple Crown BX a couple of years ago while riding plates. It should be no surprise that the top BXers used to ride plates - if you want to win in BX, you need to know how to race, and if you want to race you need to ride plates. One thing I do find a little surprising about people riding BX on plates is that none of them seem to use Intec heels. It would seem to me that the quick eject and step-in of them is essential to placing well if you go down with other riders because they would allow you to get back up fast, skate, and then step in while you're moving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_watkins Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 you can watch the raw footage on espn's website and come up with your own conclusions, but as far as I'm concerned, anyone in that race can definately "cut it". that course looks interesting... the boarders couldn't get the speed to land on the transitions of some of the tables, so definately think that'd punish someone in hardboots more than someone in softies. doesn't look like the there were any technical turns, mostly just gliding the berm. so all that I think would bias you to using softboots over hardboots. on the other hand, something great about the course is it seemed to provide a lot of passing, so the races were actually races down to the line, not like some of the FIS boardercross I've seen where the hole shot really settles the race. I don't know jack, but it looks to me that the course dictates the setup, and I'm pretty sure anyone competing at that level could rail a lunch tray faster than most of us could ever hope to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdboytyler Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by dragonfly jones Hard booters slumming in softies WIN X GOLD! (so they weren't riding them today, check them and know them) ... It is my belief that at the end of the end the fastest guys who take home checks will have been HARDBOOTERS - even if they gave it up to make $$$ in Cross or Freedogging. The roots don't lie unlike your "blonde" ex. The big question is, why did these hardbooters switch to the soft setup? Is it because a soft setup really is better in some situations outstide of the park/halfpipe? Or is it because the riders switched to a soft setup because of sponsor pressure? I tend to believe the riders switched for the performance issue and not because of sponsor pressure. I always prefer to hit a jump in softboots and low-angle stance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dragonfly jones Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 What was said "the boarders couldn't get the speed to land on the transitions of some of the tables, so definately think that'd punish someone in hardboots more than someone in softies. doesn't look like the there were any technical turns, mostly just gliding the berm. so all that I think would bias you to using softboots over hardboots. on the other hand, something great about the course is it seemed to provide a lot of passing, so the races were actually races down to the line, not like some of the FIS boardercross I've seen where the hole shot really settles the race." I have been on that course and have coached on that hill - last year and seemingly this year fast skis and boards ruled the roost. And I would agree that some courses really dictate either hard or soft set ups - this course is a softy for the most part. Yeah some good action and the win was well deserved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 Originally posted by Kent I was being a bit anal today and timed some runs. The skiers were avging in the low 40s. Boarders were in the high 50s. EEEK! Is there really any doubt about the superiority of skis as a racing tool? Not to mention jumping big and sticking it with speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philw Posted January 27, 2004 Report Share Posted January 27, 2004 Is there really any doubt about the superiority of skis as a racing tool? Not to mention jumping big and sticking it with speed. Or as a pipe toool, to judge by the way skiers perform. But it's still interesting that you can apparently race softies in some conditions... I'd say that the boarder-x courses are specifically designed to allow that, nothing more. It's an interesting response to poor equipment... get 'em interested in something which doesn't require good gear. But of course I'm biased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NateW Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 On the one hand, there's the notion that the course was so easy the hard boots had no advantage. On the other hand there's the notion that the course was challenging enough that skiers had a 20% advantage. How can those both be true? I did a little bit of ski snowboard slalom a few years ago, and my time on skis was about 15% faster than my time on a board (32 vs 36 seconds). Low-40s vs high-50s seems like a huge difference. Skiers had a big advantage, why didn't hardbooters? I have no doubt that hard boots would be a big advantage on a more conventional racecourse (gets, etc), so what was it about this course that made hard boots irrelevant while making skis such an advantage? Do skiers normally beat boarders so handily in Xxxx-cross races? I guess I can imagine poles and a wide stance being pretty helpful when riding in a tight pack, whereas a narrow board might even be a disadvantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason_watkins Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 like I said, I know nothing... but my armchair guess is that what mattered was not scrubbing speed on the landings. With the boarders, the winners definately seemed to be the folks best at landing the board flat. So I think having soft boots with flex in the ankle would let you make a quicker reaction to flatten the board as you land. Someone in a harder setup would need to really nail the launch, as once landing they'd have to move the larger joints to make any correction. If you watch the video of the semi's with klug and the other guy in indy's, it really seems to me they loose on the landings. Klug especially seemed to gain as he glided, only to lose it again on the next jump. I believe skiers simply glide faster, and they could enter the course with a higher speed by poling out of the gates. Because of that, they almost always had enough speed to carry their jumps onto the transition instead of the flat. With that number of jumps, the difference between landing on the flat and on the trannie could really add up, and I think that's one of the big things going on with the skiers vs the boarders. But like I said, I know squat, so if someone can poke holes in my armchair theories here, speak up... I'm really curious about it all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rocks Posted January 28, 2004 Report Share Posted January 28, 2004 Boarder cross is a lot of bumping and jumping. Need stability more than speed and teched out carves. Skiier X does not use downhill racing skiis. If you stay on your feet you have a decent chance of getting podium. Keys to Boarder X a)Hole shot b)stay on your feet Being big and strong is also a plus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.