Angles versus waist width?

[Mike T]

An excellent instructor I once took some lessons from (Phil!) emphasized this as well—starting transitions/turns from the bottom up. That definitely makes sense, and I've spent time working on that.

But (sorry, I know—here I go again)...is there something wrong with starting transitions/turns from the top down?

Seems like the steeper your angles, the more you turn top-down (since bottom-up transitions don't work as well as you don't have as much ankle leverage). Just observing better carvers than me, it almost seems (on groomers anyway) that top-down transitions can be (or appear) smoother and less "hair trigger" than bottom-up. (Think of how a slalom water skier turns, as an analogy.)

All I can say is, every coach that has made a difference in my riding has been a proponent of riding from the board up.

In my "I know enough to be dangerous" mind, what's wrong with starting from the top down is that it is slower and you have less control over edge angle and thus less control over the intensity of your turn. If a true coach can augment or correct that statement please do, I won't be offended.

I don't find "bottom up" to be hair-trigger at all - just very efficient. And on days when my riding is sucking, that's usually the first thing I remember to work on and then I stop sucking so bad.

[Dave ESPI]

I envy riders with

"small feet".

Even at 65 degrees I'm screwed with my Mondo 32 boots and will never be able to ride some of the pencils that allow for super snappy edge changes.

I was extremely jealous of some riders I was with this weekend.... almost made me want to lop off my toes to fit in a smaller boot.

But then I realised I could squvish them with my massive stomppad foot print, and was "King of the tread!":biggthump

On narrow boards, I found I have to run the rear foot at a higher angle than the front to eleminate toe drag. It changed how I needed to angle my body and pressure my edge changes. I'm presently on a wider board and at 55 front and 50 rear and not really all that comfortable with that low of an angle as I tend to put myself into the "toilet seat" on the heelside. It became apparent to me this past weekend when I had not ridden in hardboots for 10+ days and was teaching all week in softies.

[Jack M]

personally I think its good for people to go steep for some time in their carving development. I was in the 60s for more than a couple seasons and started to back down last year. Im now at 55-50 and ride with far more power and versatility than ever before.

For me its about the all mountain experience, I dont want to limit where I go or how I ride by stance angles. Yes there are people that can ride anything at plus 60 but face it, you get more power at slightly lower angles, especially at 20 cm and up waists.

Agreed all around. It is good to know what riding at many different angles is like. At 66 degrees, my board was strictly for carving only. (well, I would force it to do other things sometimes, but it was never all that fun.) At 58 degrees, the whole mountain is my oyster.

People can carve on whatever if they practice at it, so I can't tell you, Scott, what is "too low". You should see Seth Wescott carve his bx board in person. To draw an analogy to motorcycles, when I go to track days, there are guys there on friggen motocross bikes with street size wheels and slick tires and they embarrass a lot of dudes on sport bikes, myself included. But ultimately the fastest racers are on sport bikes for a reason, and the best carvers are on race boards with hardboots and angles around 55 to 65 degrees. Personally I would say 50 is too low.

[RCrobar]

Hi Scott

I am curious what type of terrain and what type of turns you see yourself making or learning to make on your new almountain board; regardless of width or stance angles you arrive at.

Check out the terrain and type of turns on the following SES YouTube video. The terrain and turns at the 1:48 and 2:24 mark of the video are how many see an almountain board being used.

Is this how you see using your almountain board?

Rob

[SWriverstone]

Agreed all around. It is good to know what riding at many different angles is like. At 66 degrees, my board was strictly for carving only. (well, I would force it to do other things sometimes, but it was never all that fun.) At 58 degrees, the whole mountain is my oyster.

Believe me...if I actually rode a mountain that had anything *other* than groomers, I'd be more interested in an all-mountain board with more relaxed angles. As it is, all I do is carve groomers—100%. Nothing else. (And that's okay with me.)

People can carve on whatever if they practice at it

That's always been my philosophy...but sometimes I get swayed a bit by all the pronouncements about what we "should" be doing. :) I have great faith in human adaptability.

To draw an analogy to motorcycles, when I go to track days, there are guys there on friggen motocross bikes with street size wheels and slick tires and they embarrass a lot of dudes on sport bikes, myself included. But ultimately the fastest racers are on sport bikes for a reason, and the best carvers are on race boards with hardboots and angles around 55 to 65 degrees. Personally I would say 50 is too low.

Good analogy. I'm a motorcyclist too...and though people often look at me like I'm crazy, I've done 5,000-mile tours, fully loaded up, on my KLR650 thumper—and had a blast doing it! (Many people would say a KLR is *not* a good bike for long-distance touring.)

Scott

[MUD]

I suppose you could say I'm a "pure" alpine carver in the sense that unlike a lot of people around here, I wasn't a freeride softbooter before I got into carving. That style of riding (freeride softbooting) holds no interest for me at all. My point being that carvers who spent a lot of time as a softbooter seem to value retaining a certain degree of "softbooter technique" on their carving boards.

I see (correctly or incorrectly) carving as a different animal altogether, with totally different technique. To me, carving is about facing the front of the board, not facing sideways...hence my bias toward steeper angles.

You will find many people on here that have the same opinion as you about softboots.

I am a softbooter by heart and with the purchase of my Tanker have been riding them more and more. I would not say I value retaining my "softbooter technique", it just allows me to think about my carving a little differently since my experience is coming from softboots.

I ride 57/54 on my alpine decks, if I go steeper I don't like it. I can't go less without boot out.

I ride 27/9 on my tanker 188. I LOVE IT! and if you think I can't carve on it, ask some of the guys I ride with (although I am working out a little boot out on that one). I run rather flexy boots with stiff bindings.

My 2 cents.

[Jack M]

Believe me...if I actually rode a mountain that had anything *other* than groomers, I'd be more interested in an all-mountain board with more relaxed angles. As it is, all I do is carve groomers—100%. Nothing else. (And that's okay with me.)

Don't get me wrong, my new lower angles are better for carving too than my old higher angles. Being able to work my ankles better has done a lot of good for my carving.

[ohiomoto]

I bought my board back in 95 and never rode a soft boot until last season. I have fun carving on that board too.

Anyway, also never rode a true hard boot until about a week ago. I use to run 60/60 with my 29.5 ski boots and still had overhang. Now I run 55/55. I feel much better riding in the new boots. My biggest issue at this point is that I feel like I'm still searching for the key to consistent healside turns. It feels like if I rotate into the turn too much all the pressure goes to the front foot and the back of the board slides slightly. I get some really nice turns too, but I can't figure out the key to keeping the carve clean.

I've wondered if I'm getting enough edge angle and if in need more leverage. But then thought if I got more leverage from the front boot, it would load up even more. ???

(Not trying to hijack the thread. This just feels like the right place to ask.)

[MUD]

I didn't mean for my last post to sound defensive if it did......

All I meant is, ride what you like. What works for some may not work for others. It's all about getting down the hill, making some turns and having fun doing it.

I do understand the curiosity though.....

[ur13]

Don't get me wrong, my new lower angles are better for carving too than my old higher angles. Being able to work my ankles better has done a lot of good for my carving.

Working my ankles was what I relied on for so many years with lower angles. With narrow boards I struggled with the higher angles for that fact it took me a while to figure out that ankles played less of a role. Increasing my angles has helped alot to get that through my head.

The whole higher angle thing happened by accident anyway. When I mounted my trusty TD1s on my Madd 158 this season it had been a few years since I set up a board. I misread the angles on the plates and then realized I was close to their limit (close to 70*). I rode like that for two days before I realized the angles were not the 60/57 I thought I put on there (my old "angles". I was having a much better time riding the board and was far more aggressive, the angle change made a noticeable difference. Especially when I stepped onto my Donek Freecarve, which I had mounted a new set of OS2s on (which I knew were set to 60/57 correctly)...I had alot of the same issues I struggled with when I was riding alot learning how to ride the higher angles. As soon as I moved those to 70/70 those issues went away and all was right again. Most of it is in my head but it sure has changed my riding this season...

[ar(angel]

I liken the angle argument to the same argument my racing friends and I used to have when I raced street bikes. The guys with motocross backgrounds were always more comfortable "sliding" their bikes in turns as opposed to us guys who strictly learned how to ride on pavement with no dirt background. The dirt guys were use to the bike getting "loose" underneath them so when their bikes started to slide they didn't go to pucker factor zulu like those with no dirt training. I always found it was the one element of my riding that kept me from feeling complete as a rider and something I worked on constantly. I view alpine much the same way. Those with freeride backgrounds seem to be more at ease with control issues wether angle or terrain induced as to those who didn't come from a freeride background. Mind you this is IMHO....no flames here please! When people ask me on the lift about my gear I always say "a freeride board is like a motocross bike, my board is like a street bike" they seem to understand this right away and usually grin from ear to ear as the lightbulb goes off over their head. I ride 66/62 right now (weird I know) up from 65/60 due to a lack of feeling in my heelsides and more comfort facing the nose of the board. I also tend to ride "gunslinger" and find steeper angles accommodate this much easier. Just my 2 cents...

[serge]

My biggest issue at this point is that I feel like I'm still searching for the key to consistent healside turns. It feels like if I rotate into the turn too much all the pressure goes to the front foot and the back of the board slides slightly. I get some really nice turns too, but I can't figure out the key to keeping the carve clean.

I've wondered if I'm getting enough edge angle and if in need more leverage. But then thought if I got more leverage from the front boot, it would load up even more. ???

(Not trying to hijack the thread. This just feels like the right place to ask.)

This is a great thread! Learning so much here...

This is my first season on HB on a Donek FCII167. I had the same problem earlier this season. After reading one of Jack's article (I want more of them!!!:D) and some other threads on this board.

http://www.bomberonline.com/articles/canting.cfm,

I setup my rear heel lift from 3 to 6 degrees, kept the front @3 and put some outward can't , heel side was mucho better, and hips were much lower than before., no more sliding at the tail, just a nice thin line... BTW, I run 60/57 on the bindings...

Now. I have to go and read his toe-side article , because it is now my weak side:smashfrea

i don't know if this could be your problem, but it helped me...

And I hope it is ok to post something a bit off topic

[BlueB]

My biggest issue at this point is that I feel like I'm still searching for the key to consistent healside turns. It feels like if I rotate into the turn too much all the pressure goes to the front foot and the back of the board slides slightly. I get some really nice turns too, but I can't figure out the key to keeping the carve clean.

Once you initiated by rotation into the turn and driving the front knee, drive the board further up by pressing your rear knee into the turn too. Also, feed the board forward, under you, that would load the tail towards the end of the turn.

You are a skier - just like carving skis - both legs have to do their work...

[NateW]

Some quick observations:

17cm waist, 70ish angles: it worked, and carves just fine, but off-piste or in situations where I needed to counter-rotate and/or make skidding turns, I felt constrained, like my thighs are colliding before I can get my upper body rotated enough. Especially toeside traverses or skids as I'm looking downhill (which happens on every other mogul). I broke that board, and while I was very sad to see it go, I didn't replace it.

19cm waist, 60ish angles: Nirvana, utopia, heaven, etc. Carves great, jumps great, bumps great. When this one breaks I'll get another just like it. Maybe two.

21cm waist, 55/50 angles: Everything works fine, but on heelsides I felt like I had to strain just a little bit to get my upper body forward and my ass over the tail. Broke this one too, and bought another similar board because the price was right.

23cm waist, 45/40 angles: Everything works, just takes more conscious effort to keep my upper body in position on heelsides. This is my rock board setup, I don't mind it, but I'm always happy to get back onto my primary board. When this one finally expires, 21cm will be the widest thing I own.

[NateW]

The whole thing still seems a bit vague and subjective, though.

I think that's because it is a vague and subjective issue. :)

[Bobby Buggs]

See I went from a Free ride hard boot set up, 45/35 to a real "street bike":biggthump and 60's angles. I was SO freaked out that I lost the back foot kick but it really made me learn how to ride with hips and knees. Once I got that down lowering the angles brought a new level of power to the edge from the Ankles and Im Very happy in the mid to low 50s. For some flexability is a huge factor. Im just about as stiff as you can be and still ride a board:o The higher angles made it a bit easier to assume "the Position" and learn. Going below 55 on my front foot can be a problem for me now, my hip and knee start to scream.

[Hotbeans]

Shoot, just put one foot in front of the other, both pointing forward, and have someone push you from the side. (high angles)

Then, place both feet shoulder width apart and have someone push you in the chest. (very low angles).

Better yet, how are feet angled in a neutral stance in karate? Hmmmm.

[ohiomoto]

Once you initiated by rotation into the turn and driving the front knee, drive the board further up by pressing your rear knee into the turn too. Also, feed the board forward, under you, that would load the tail towards the end of the turn.

You are a skier - just like carving skis - both legs have to do their work...

Thank you. This is very helpful. That's what I've been doing so I know that I'm at least headed in the right direction.

Two more questions:

1) About rotation? Is it progressive and ongoing throughout the turn? What I mean is do you keep adding more or is there a point (maybe as you begin crossing the fall line as you exit the turn) at which you need to back off? I wonder if I might be over-rotating on my heal side turns. When I carve round turns on skis, I rotate my lower half/hips throughout the turn. I keep playing with it on the snowboard, but I'm not 100% sure what's going on yet.

(I'm not trying to take this too far off topic. I just think I need to understand this before I can fine tune my set up. )

2) I have the original TD1s with 3* in the back and 0* up front. My board will only allow me a 19" stance which is slightly narrower than my shoulders. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think I can run too much more heal lift because my stance isn't very wide to begin with. The TD1s don't allow me to cant the boot outward, though I could use the cuff to open my knees up. I was thinking about putting the 3* disk up front and flat on the back. My thought was that it put more weight to the back foot and open up my back knee allowing me to drive it into the turn more. Or maybe I should try running less forward lean on the back boot even though it sounds counter productive. Do either of these idea have any merit?

[DjulezD]

Shoot, just put one foot in front of the other, both pointing forward, and have someone push you from the side. (high angles)

Then, place both feet shoulder width apart and have someone push you in the chest. (very low angles).

Better yet, how are feet angled in a neutral stance in karate? Hmmmm.

One more supporter of the duck stance....

Actually, I suspect it is the easiest way to make a 360° toeside carve.

[SWriverstone]

I have a thought that's hard to articulate...but it goes something like this:

With steep angles, everyone agrees you have less leverage at the ankles (heel-to-toe). But...what I've found is that I can still easily transition and turn the board through full body leans.

Even if you used no ankle whatsoever in turns...the sheer mass and weight of your upper body exerts an enormous force—and this force can easily be transferred right to the base of the board simply by the degree to which you stiffen your entire body (or the degree to which you do/don't break at the hips). I'm not advocating riding stiff (I don't)...just suggesting that it's not necessarily true that you have no leverage over the board if you can't tip it with your ankles. (Again, think about how a slalom water skier turns.)

I think this "full body, steep angles" style of control is harder, because it takes more commitment (e.g. tilting your entire body downhill on steeper slopes), not to mention good balance. And kind of like riding a bicycle, it definitely works best the faster you go! (Don't try this moving at 2mph, LOL.)

Maybe this style comes more naturally to me because I spent many years as a whitewater slalom C-1 paddler. If anyone here has ever seen a slalom C-1, you know how dicey it is—it's a thin, flat platform with sharp edges that you're literally strapped into by the legs, and your CG is very high due to the fact that you're kneeling (not sitting). Paddling C-1 is all about precisely throwing your upper body around (as well as using your hips). Which feels (to me) a lot like controlling a snowboard with your whole body (and not just your ankles).

Scott

[Phil]

Seems like the steeper your angles, the more you turn top-down (since bottom-up transitions don't work as well as you don't have as much ankle leverage). Just observing better carvers than me, it almost seems (on groomers anyway) that top-down transitions can be (or appear) smoother and less "hair trigger" than bottom-up. (Think of how a slalom water skier turns, as an analogy.)

Does the tail wag the dog?

I love this quote. It sums up what I think of top down vs. bottom up. The slalom water skier turn analogy breaks down quickly because the impetus for their turning is coming from both tension on the rope and ground reaction force. We have no rope.

I think that bottom up is more effective overall regardless of your angles. The difference is that you are using inversion/eversion more as opposed to plantar/dorsiflexion in your ankles.

Plantar/dorsiflexion:

Inversion/eversion:

Inversion/eversion causes smaller overall movements when compared to plantar/dorsiflexion, but is still effective at high angles on a narrow board because you don't have to move your center of mass as far to be over the edge. It is also made possible by the fact that the boots do not flex laterally as much. Yes, it may seem easier to ride top down with higher angles, but I would still argue that it is not as efficient/effective. In fact, skiers have a forward stance and even laterally stiffer boots, but are taught bottom up as well. (because the tail does not wag the dog) As a complete generality, I believe that higher angles allow a rider to be lazier if all they ride groomers. You may find this appealing. This ability to be lazy is hampered by any kind of subpar conditions, though.

On a snowboard, we need to be able to move laterally (over our edges) and fore and aft. We also have to be able to combine the two and move anywhere in between. The higher your angles, the more you are using plantar/dorsiflexion for your fore and aft movements, so you will be able to move further this way. OTOH, with low angles, you will be able to move more laterally just by using plantar/dorsiflexion. At 45 degrees, you are using a balance of inversion/eversion and plantar/dorsiflexion for both lateral and fore and aft movements. Then you throw in foot to foot movements and you have more stability fore and aft naturally. With that in mind, I believe that you will find more advantages with lower angles. By lower angles, I mean closer to 45 degrees as opposed to 70 degrees or higher. If the main advantage to higher angles is fore and aft movement, you can have that with lower angles by using foot to foot movements.

Here are some other quotes that I think are pertinent:

It seems to me one other reason that slightly wider boards are being used is that a lower stance angle allows for bigger and more powerful pivoting movements. While pivoting is generally detrimental to carving (as it can result in skidding, scrubbing speed), when the course requires it most successful racers are able to pivot their unweighted boards in the transition, and to 'lock on' to a carve to maintain a fast line. It has been my experience that lower angles are much better than high ones for these pivoting, 'leg scissoring' moves.

You can feel this for yourself by standing up now, as you read this. Try standing with very high stance angles and then then try stepping your feet to move your legs through this pivoting move. I think you'll find that higher angles allow a smaller range of movement than lower angles. Lower angles also recruit stronger muscle groups and allow for further pivoting movement through using the knee as a hinge to 'sweep' the foot.

Not only does this result in quicker, stronger, accurate movements, it also results in better balance, as it seems that riders with extremely high angles have to make additional movements of the upper body to get the board around, resulting in imbalance and a jerky, edge-of-control look to their turns.

It seems that for these biomechanical reasons (larger range of movement from the ball-and-socket joint in the hip, using stronger muscle groups, and, when necessary, using the knee/ankles to further sweep the board) that slightly wider boards are more useful whenever the course requires pivoting moves. If you're free riding, lower angles are useful in situations where you might need to quickly, powerfully, and accurately pivot the board, such as bumps, trees, steeps, crowded slopes, etc.

With high angles the knees and hips are used to change edges.

With lower angles, a rider can involve the ankles, which are way quicker when it comes to shifting pressure across the foot.

Combine this with all the other points raised and you can see why this change has been taking place for years.

It's been a LONG time since I saw a race of any kind where there wasn't ALOT of pivoting going on. I think the last time I saw a unbroken, clean carve from top-to-bottom was Jaseys winning run in the World Champs from Italy many years ago. This was a single GS (the last of its kind on the World Cup) and utilized the whole run from side to side, with all of the terrain changes, banks and rollers. It was a beautiful run to watch, even in the free-carve sense.

Now, parallel GS makes it harder to avoid pivoting in order to create equal courses.

[ohiomoto]

...what I've found is that I can still easily transition and turn the board through full body leans.

As a skier I'm against gross body movements and full body leans sound gross! :)

The truth is that the CM must move to the inside of the turn and large movements are going to happen. The question is do you want to get there with some precision or just flop the CM over there?

Either way, I suspect that you are splitting hairs here. Sure, 15 degrees probably makes a difference in your ability to use your ankles, but it's not like you they work at 45 degree and not at all at 60 degrees. It's more a blend of skills and a the set up might allow you to blend them differently. Is there really a right or wrong answer here?

[ohiomoto]

I think that bottom up is more effective overall regardless of your angles. The difference is that you are using inversion/eversion more as opposed to plantar/dorsiflexion in your ankles.

Plantar/dorsiflexion:

Inversion/eversion:

Nicely done!

[Neil Gendzwill]

Is there really a right or wrong answer here?

Of course not, the answer is a blend of your body mechanics, capability, what you're used to, and the terrain you like to ride. When I see guys with very forward stances on narrow boards, they look great on the groomed to me but the whole setup looks too teetery (for lack of a better word) for what I want to do. I've never experimented with angles above 45 so who knows, maybe 60 would work great. I'm pretty sure it would improve my heelsides on the groomed, which tend to wash out a little at the tail.

But everything I read tells me I'm in the right ballpark for the stuff I like to do which is mostly off the groomed, so I'd prefer to use my riding time to get better with the stance I'm used to rather than experimenting with a whole bunch of other setups.

[Jack M]

What Rob Stevens said. Bottom-up carving is better and more agile. Moderately lower angles are more effective for this.

Again, with 50 degrees being "too low" imho. Below that typically leads to toilet sitting on heelside and bending over towards the snow at the waist on toeside.