Angles versus waist width?

[Neil Gendzwill]

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.

My avatar is a toeside with 45/40 angles. It's from this little video. I'm definitely too rotated there, but it's the only clip I've got :). At any rate, I'm not reaching for the snow, and I don't typically do so.

[Jack M]

My avatar is a toeside with 45/40 angles. It's from this little video. I'm definitely too rotated there, but it's the only clip I've got :). At any rate, I'm not reaching for the snow, and I don't typically do so.

Yes but it looks like you are bending over at the waist towards the snow.

[Neil Gendzwill]

I don't think so but then I don't get a lot of feedback normally. It's certainly more work on toeside to create angulation and get over the edge, and I'll buy that it's easier at higher angles. One more reason to drag my sorry butt to SES one of these years - constructive criticism from guys better than me would help a lot.

[SWriverstone]

As an intermediate who's still got a lot to learn...one thing about carving seems counter-intuitive: people often say "square your shoulders to the board." This is reinforced by correlary suggestions like grabbing your front boot on heelsides, etc. So the general message I often get is...face the toe of the board!

But then we have (for perfectly logical reasons) the argument that 45-50 degrees is best. So looking at it from a biomechanics perspective, it seems inefficient for your body to be "twisted," that is, toes pointing one way, body pointed another.

Phil, one of your comments struck me in particular: when you said "I believe that higher angles allow a rider to be lazier if all they ride groomers." Yes! I think this is absolutely true, and points to a basic question, which is "How does each of us perceive carving?"

For me, being "lazy" might better be described as learning to do something with the least amount of effort possible—that is, being completely, totally relaxed throughout the entire range of motions. When I'm carving, I absolutely love the feeling of just leaning my body one way or another and carving smooth turns (yes, on a smooth surface!). To me, that's what carving is. So to the extent they allow me to fully "Zen" my way through smooth turns, I like higher angles.

Following the motorcycling analogy, I'm definitely all about sportbikes on clean, smooth pavement. (And it's worth mentioning that the goal when riding sportbikes on clean pavement is to be completely relaxed and using as little motion and input as possible.)

So...even though there's no "right" answer to the whole angle question...perhaps one way to point people in one direction or another is to simply ask "What's your definition of carving?"

For some, it might be a mix of groomers, powder, trees, and moguls. For those people, it sounds like (from what I'm reading) lower angles are ideal as they offer a greater range of motion and greater strength for rapid moves.

For others, carving might be nothing more than pure, simple, smooth turns on smooth, well-groomed slopes. For them, higher angles may be more appropriate (but that's not saying you can't carve groomers with lower angles).

Good discussion! (I'm learning a lot.)

Scott

[Neil Gendzwill]

As an intermediate who's still got a lot to learn...one thing about carving seems counter-intuitive: people often say "square your shoulders to the board." This is reinforced by correlary suggestions like grabbing your front boot on heelsides, etc. So the general message I often get is...face the toe of the board!

But then we have (for perfectly logical reasons) the argument that 45-50 degrees is best. So looking at it from a biomechanics perspective, it seems inefficient for your body to be "twisted," that is, toes pointing one way, body pointed another.

That little video I posted shows my square to the nose more or less on 45 degrees. But I'm working to be more neutral, as I think being more square to the binding angles will put less rotational pressure on the board. Especially on heelsides, I tend to wash out a little when it gets steeper and I think that's my tendency to be square to the nose rather than the bindings.

Living in the flats sucks. I think a guy like Bordy gets in more days in the average year than I do in the average decade.

[SWriverstone]

That little video I posted shows my square to the nose more or less on 45 degrees. But I'm working to be more neutral, as I think being more square to the binding angles will put less rotational pressure on the board. Especially on heelsides, I tend to wash out a little when it gets steeper and I think that's my tendency to be square to the nose rather than the bindings.

Living in the flats sucks. I think a guy like Bordy gets in more days in the average year than I do in the average decade.

The Eurocarving guys agree with you Neil—on extremecarving.com, in the Technique section, they specifically state that your upper body should face the direction of your bindings...not the board.

Makes sense to me...but I still *want* to face the toe of the board! :D

Scott

[Jack M]

But then we have (for perfectly logical reasons) the argument that 45-50 degrees is best. So looking at it from a biomechanics perspective, it seems inefficient for your body to be "twisted," that is, toes pointing one way, body pointed another.

Good grief, are a lot of people saying 45-50? Way too low imo. I'm at 58 and I think it's "just right". Much better than 66 anyway.

[SWriverstone]

Good grief, are a lot of people saying 45-50? Way too low imo. I'm at 58 and I think it's "just right". Much better than 66 anyway.

Well, I don't know if a lot of people are saying 45-50...but there have been a few comments to the effect that 45 degrees offers the best compromise between lateral and fore/aft ankle movements.

From Alpinecarving.com:

Jasey Jay: 60/60

Chris Klug: 57/54

Mark Fawcett: 60/60

Sigi Grabner: 54/51

Mathieu Bozzetto: 58/48

So for the hotshots, a range of anywhere from 48 to 60.

Scott

[tex1230]

Well, I don't know if a lot of people are saying 45-50...but there have been a few comments to the effect that 45 degrees offers the best compromise between lateral and fore/aft ankle movements.

From Alpinecarving.com:

Jasey Jay: 60/60

Chris Klug: 57/54

Mark Fawcett: 60/60

Sigi Grabner: 54/51

Mathieu Bozzetto: 58/48

So for the hotshots, a range of anywhere from 48 to 60.

Scott

I guarantee those are average stances. There is no way anyone at that level doesn't adjust angles when he gets on a wider or narrower board.

[SWriverstone]

BTW...is there any sort of math that can be used (without actually putting the boot on the binding and rotating it) to determine the lowest angle for a given width board with a given length boot shell?

For example,

• 17.5 board waist

• M28 boot shells

What's the lowest angle I could run?

Scott

[jp1]

" I think you may have the JP1 disease, too much reading and chatting and just ride, ride ride ride ride ride, rid with others, ride some more, eat, sleep ride ride ride."

[DjulezD]

the magic formula you are looking for could be:

cos(angle) = waist width / boot sole length

So, for a 19 width and a 32 sole length, the minimum angle should be about 53.5 °.

[LeeW]

I've always felt adjusting the binding angles is an infinite struggle to find the "sweet spot."

[Neil Gendzwill]

The formula is a little more complicated than that because the width of the board is changing depending on your stance width and angle, also you need to consider the length of the sole from corner to corner, the angle of the toe and heel pieces, the rise of the bindings....

Way easier to set it up and see. I suppose alternately you could superimpose drawings of the boot soles over a drawing of the board.

[Corey]

cos(angle) = waist width / boot sole length

So, for a 19 width and a 32 sole length, the minimum angle should be about 53.5 °.

That'll get you close, but because the boot has some width this formula will give you lower angles than are acheivable without overhang. The math gets ugly REAL quick for this.

The absolute quickest way is to draw two parallel lines on paper that are the width of the desired board's waist. Then see what angle your boot will fit in there completely. You can get a tiny bit more angle than this in real life due to the flaring of the sidecut, but that'll just be a degree or two.

[bobdea]

this is the most overly complicated thread I have seen here in awhile.

too much drag is bad, underhang really sucks too with most boards.

when you set up your board you can probably run lower angles than you think.

getting your canting and stance width perfect is harder to do and I'd focus on that, angles are simple.

[Dave ESPI]

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.

Nailhead.

Having just come off a lot of time in soft gear when I got back in my HBs this past weekend my posture, form and ride style were a mess for a few runs. Couple that with being tired and struggling with constantly re adjusting my weight and turns from wanting to be in a "race" position and also wanting to square my shoulders and also lead with my hips in heelside turns(completely wrong) I rapidly became aware the low angles were not working for me. I turned them back up to low/ mid 60s and my form improved with keeping my back foot under me and not wanting to twist my hip out on the heelside.

There really is a happy medium somewhere.... just have to find it. :)

[philw]

Obviously it's a question of taste, and perhaps what you ride. it's easy enough to experiment, and I've been there, done that. I'd want to re-experiment for any new piste board I came into also.

A few years ago boards were narrow and angles were high; more recently I've backed off so now I ride both piste and off piste with the same angles - around 55 each (F2 slalom/ Lib Tech Snow Mullet).

If you're riding only smooth pistes then maybe you could use a narrower board and go higher for some benefit. It's like board choice, a question of what works for you.