Riding moguls

[philw]

Useful - it's good to see boarders taking the challenge.

Certainly these could be considered hero bumps, because they are waaay too forgiving with all the snow we got last night.

You beat me to it: it's all good, but those do look rather friendly.

I'm pretty sure you can't turn as quickly with that stance as a race stance, but it's good to know it can at least be done. It would, as you suggest, be interesting to see that on less friendly bumps. I'm not particularly a sceptic, more just curious how it would look.

[Sooperburd]

Useful - it's good to see boarders taking the challenge.

You beat me to it: it's all good, but those do look rather friendly.

I'm pretty sure you can't turn as quickly with that stance as a race stance, but it's good to know it can at least be done. It would, as you suggest, be interesting to see that on less friendly bumps. I'm not particularly a sceptic, more just curious how it would look.

I think I can turn more quickly with my stance than with higher binding angles. With my lower body pretty much perpendicular to the board, I'm using my quads, glutes, and hamstrings (all powerful muscle groups) to turn the board with my back foot. With more forward angles, the abductors and adductors (much weaker muscles) are the muscles used to turn the board. The weaker muscles simply can't put the same amount of power into the board as the stronger muscles, resulting in slower, more labored turning.

In addition, I'm sighting the line ahead and I can see when I really need to make fast turns. When a fast turn section comes up, I lean more downhill and unweight my back foot. This makes lightning fast turns even easier.

On icier, more defined bumps, I increase my speed over what's in the videos. These nebulous moguls are difficult to sight a line on. The icier ones are actually better for me, and more fun in some ways.

[BlueB]

Nice riding Sooper!

Keep the videos rolling in, guys. We get plenty of good carving vids, but would be nice to see more "bumpy" rides.

As for the angles, I ride moguls better with lower angle and more splay (surf stance). I drop my alpine stance to something like 45/25 or 50/30 for moguls and freeride.

Softies allowed me more mobillity then hard boots, but my feet hurt like hell when riding aggressive, especially on frozen stuf, so I stick to hard boots. They give me more power and precision in trade of for mobillity.

I ride only soft moguls. When they are frozen, the groomers are stellar for carving. Also, it hurts less, that way. ;)

[Rob Stevens]

I think I can turn more quickly with my stance than with higher binding angles. With my lower body pretty much perpendicular to the board, I'm using my quads, glutes, and hamstrings (all powerful muscle groups) to turn the board with my back foot. With more forward angles, the abductors and adductors (much weaker muscles) are the muscles used to turn the board. The weaker muscles simply can't put the same amount of power into the board as the stronger muscles, resulting in slower, more labored turning.

Your "glutes" are your abductors.

The act of "Steering" shouldn't be hampered by the angles of your stance. This is more a function of practice than anything. The body will recruit the muscle groups it needs in either case, but what all riders will find, regardless of stance, is that all of these movements, low angles or high, are supported by the core.

There is no substitute for a strong core. With a weak core, these positions will still be possible, but can only be sustained for short periods.

Thanks for the video. It's important to this discussion to see the degree of pitch that you're riding in order to reference it to the OP's terrain, KT at Squaw.

I was just at Kicking Horse in Golden yesterday on a CASI level 4 shred day. Two of our lead guys work and live there, so of course were super amped to get us on to the gnar. The day started with 50 degree bumps. No ****.

The direct line, with 45 degree displacement of the board, was not an option. If you did not complete each turn and finish across the fall line, you were f u c k e d. Not just a fall, but a good chance of a trip to the hospital would be the result of letting your speed get away from you.

Only a couple of the boys could really dominate it and ,again, they did it with short radius turns, fully finished, with early edge changes and narrow lines of displacement. Of course, following the unevenly spaced and erratically sized troughs was a complete non-starter, unless you were ok with side-slipping alot.

Beleive me, some of the older level 4's were doing just that. Not that they couldn't do it under the right conditions, but these were not the right conditions.

By the way, all of us, to a man, ride duck.

Sooper... If you're into it, I'd like to comment on the vids. Normally, the last thing to come into the picture is planar and dorsiflexion of the feet in a turn. Without it, a rider can have all the knee and hip movement possible, but still require counter-rotation to fully execute a complete turning cycle.

If you wanted to, you could use groomed terrain to set yourself up an imaginary slalom, where the "gates" were as tight together as you could handle.

With a very narrow track in mind, attempt the most turns you can fit into a given amount of vertical.

The goal is fast feet with a stable uper body. Right now, you are countering the boards turning force with opposite movement in the shoulders. This comes from a very flat, unedging board throught the middle phase of the turn. You will still "scrub" in the same way and in the same place, but be "slarving", with more turn shape, beforehand.

Your Centre of Mass will now be stabilized from the Base of Support rather than the upper body countering.

I love more freindly, lower angle bumps like the ones in the vids... You can really work on fast feet and a super direct (zipper) line without worrying about having to get long-lined off the mountain under the rescue heli.

[Sooperburd]

Thanks for all your input, Rob. I have a lot of questions, though.

The act of "Steering" shouldn't be hampered by the angles of your stance. This is more a function of practice than anything.

I don't agree. While I am no doctor and don't know the names of all the muscles, I have a mechanical engineering degree. Certain body positions clearly have better power for certain types of movements than others. If the movement is kicking the board from side to side, the running muscles (quads, butt, and hamstrings) are clearly better suited for this than the muscles used for jumping jacks. Do you disagree?

There is no substitute for a strong core. With a weak core, these positions will still be possible, but can only be sustained for short periods.

Maybe so, but after a long day of nothing but moguls, my core isn't sore. My legs are plenty sore, though. No leg strength, but lots of core strength does not a good bump rider make.

Thanks for the video. It's important to this discussion to see the degree of pitch that you're riding in order to reference it to the OP's terrain, KT at Squaw.

I was just at Kicking Horse in Golden yesterday on a CASI level 4 shred day. Two of our lead guys work and live there, so of course were super amped to get us on to the gnar. The day started with 50 degree bumps. No ****.

The direct line, with 45 degree displacement of the board, was not an option. If you did not complete each turn and finish across the fall line, you were f u c k e d. Not just a fall, but a good chance of a trip to the hospital would be the result of letting your speed get away from you.

Only a couple of the boys could really dominate it and ,again, they did it with short radius turns, fully finished, with early edge changes and narrow lines of displacement. Of course, following the unevenly spaced and erratically sized troughs was a complete non-starter, unless you were ok with side-slipping alot.

Beleive me, some of the older level 4's were doing just that. Not that they couldn't do it under the right conditions, but these were not the right conditions.

What is your point of this story? Are you trying to say the slope in my videos isn't as steep as the ones you ride? So what? The runs in the videos are actually the only bump runs I've hit at Jane this year because there are too many rocks protruding on the steeper ones. I can certainly ride anything I want with plenty of speed and finesse, but I'm not going to trash my board for the sake of showing you thousand-plus posters how tough I am. Sorry for getting crass, I just don't see the place in telling us all about the stuff you ride in a post that is clearly critiquing my riding. I don't want you to get the wrong idea, though, I'm very glad you took the time to watch my videos and comment. But I digress...

Sooper... If you're into it, I'd like to comment on the vids. Normally, the last thing to come into the picture is planar and dorsiflexion of the feet in a turn.

You're talking about the bending of the ankles? If so, I can see how it would simplify the movements. Is the point to keep the board really flat to the snow while turning?

Without it, a rider can have all the knee and hip movement possible, but still require counter-rotation to fully execute a complete turning cycle.

I understand how counter-rotation is bad for carving, but how is it bad for riding moguls? The force of turning the board must come from legs and core acting on the stationary body on top. Therefore, I don't see being able to make these quick, powerful turns without some counter-rotation, especially without ski poles in my hands. What am I missing here?

If you wanted to, you could use groomed terrain to set yourself up an imaginary slalom, where the "gates" were as tight together as you could handle.

With a very narrow track in mind, attempt the most turns you can fit into a given amount of vertical.

The goal is fast feet with a stable uper body.

Excellent idea. I'll try this.

Right now, you are countering the boards turning force with opposite movement in the shoulders. This comes from a very flat, unedging board throught the middle phase of the turn. You will still "scrub" in the same way and in the same place, but be "slarving", with more turn shape, beforehand.

There's no time for slarving when your speed really gets up there. Try telling Olympic mogul skiers that they need a more carving type movement. It's just not possible because the moguls come at you too quickly.

Your Centre of Mass will now be stabilized from the Base of Support rather than the upper body countering.

What do you mean by Base of Support, and how is it different from upper body countering?

[Rob Stevens]

Thanks for all your input, Rob. I have a lot of questions, though.I don't agree. While I am no doctor and don't know the names of all the muscles, I have a mechanical engineering degree. Certain body positions clearly have better power for certain types of movements than others. If the movement is kicking the board from side to side, the running muscles (quads, butt, and hamstrings) are clearly better suited for this than the muscles used for jumping jacks. Do you disagree?

Sure I do. Your muscles do not work in isolation from each other. To think that a rider using high angles is not recruiting his or her glutes, for example, in a quick turn is wrong and based on a lack of experience with an alpine setup.

Maybe so, but after a long day of nothing but moguls, my core isn't sore. My legs are plenty sore, though. No leg strength, but lots of core strength does not a good bump rider make.

I'm not saying you can ride moguls like you do without strong legs, but in order to keep stable you need a strong core too. Many riders from other sports (like cycling) have very strong legs and little core strenth. These people, when SB'ing can be particularly susceptible to comprimised body positions as their lower body movements cannot be "damped" by the core. To not have a tired core after a day of shredding moguls is not a sign that you don't need it as much as the legs, but that you're not using it as much as you could.

What is your point of this story? Are you trying to say the slope in my videos isn't as steep as the ones you ride? So what? The runs in the videos are actually the only bump runs I've hit at Jane this year because there are too many rocks protruding on the steeper ones. I can certainly ride anything I want with plenty of speed and finesse, but I'm not going to trash my board for the sake of showing you thousand-plus posters how tough I am. Sorry for getting crass, I just don't see the place in telling us all about the stuff you ride in a post that is clearly critiquing my riding. I don't want you to get the wrong idea, though, I'm very glad you took the time to watch my videos and comment. But I digress...

In the original post, the author asked about a technique for riding bumped out pitches of the type you see at Squaw Valley. Generally, Squaw is more in line with KH than the run in your video, where if you fall, you stop soon after. I was trying to explain why I think the line you're showing is somewhat innappropriate, unless you want to risk everything.

You're talking about the bending of the ankles? If so, I can see how it would simplify the movements. Is the point to keep the board really flat to the snow while turning?

I'll give you a hint: How might you flex your ankles in either turn if you wanted to create MORE edge? I certainly didn't want to suggest less.

I understand how counter-rotation is bad for carving, but how is it bad for riding moguls? The force of turning the board must come from legs and core acting on the stationary body on top. Therefore, I don't see being able to make these quick, powerful turns without some counter-rotation, especially without ski poles in my hands. What am I missing here?

Counter rotation is not bad and it definitely has its place in snowboarding. Many moves can't be made without it, so I would never suggest anyone try to lose it, but it can be made with less effect on the upper body, specifically the arms and shoulders. We like to think of the countering force as coming from the upper abdominals of the core. Rather than resisting or creating the turning force with a movement of the upper body, which can create instability. Think about tensing the abs as something to counter against instead. I mentioned this because you're swinging your arms around and getting caught behind in places.

Excellent idea. I'll try this.

In this environment, you can really work on and feel core isolation.

There's no time for slarving when your speed really gets up there. Try telling Olympic mogul skiers that they need a more carving type movement. It's just not possible because the moguls come at you too quickly.

If you were riding a WC mogul course, on a board with no sidecut and not posting on a site where people come to talk about edging in general, I'd agree. As your chosen pitch was less steep, you could emply more edging before the scrub. If you're coming into the scrub too hot because of this, use more edge in the scrub. This would call for more advancement of the board under your core at completion to centre over the back foot for max pressure control. If you try a more edgy scrub with your pivot point still under the front foot, you'll wash.

What do you mean by Base of Support, and how is it different from upper body countering?

Your BoS is your board. Essentially, what you're trying to do to allow your upper body to stay quietly in the fall line during an entire turning cycle (Which youu know). Isolate the countering forces between your upper abdominals and your heel and toe edges. Without strong edging, it's your upper body creating the turning force and not the board, which you paid good money for and might as well use. At this point, you'll probably find that the played, floppy board isn't killing it like you thought it was.

[Sooperburd]

Sure I do. Your muscles do not work in isolation from each other. To think that a rider using high angles is not recruiting his or her glutes, for example, in a quick turn is wrong and based on a lack of experience with an alpine setup.

I agree that muscles do not work in isolation. The issue on which I disagree with you is on maximum force.

Say you are laying on your left side, knees bent 30°. You have a stack of weights on top of your right foot. You'd be able to lift (for the sake of argument) 100 pounds with that right leg by abducting the entire leg away from your body.

Now, visualize laying on your back, legs bent 30°, and a stack of weights on top of your right foot. You'd be able to lift substantially more by the kicking motion in this exercise than what you could on your side with an abducting motion.

The major muscle groups used (of course, not in isolation, nothing is in complete isolation) in the kicking motion are the same ones we use for walking and running, and are therefore more powerful. The abducting motion's major muscle groups (again, not used in isolation) are just not as strong as the ones used for the kicking motion.

I'm not saying you can ride moguls like you do without strong legs, but in order to keep stable you need a strong core too. Many riders from other sports (like cycling) have very strong legs and little core strenth. These people, when SB'ing can be particularly susceptible to comprimised body positions as their lower body movements cannot be "damped" by the core. To not have a tired core after a day of shredding moguls is not a sign that you don't need it as much as the legs, but that you're not using it as much as you could.

I'm anxious to try this out.

In the original post, the author asked about a technique for riding bumped out pitches of the type you see at Squaw Valley. Generally, Squaw is more in line with KH than the run in your video, where if you fall, you stop soon after. I was trying to explain why I think the line you're showing is somewhat innappropriate, unless you want to risk everything.

Ok, thanks for clarifying. No harm done.

I'll give you a hint: How might you flex your ankles in either turn if you wanted to create MORE edge? I certainly didn't want to suggest less.

Ohh, I understand. I was thinking something else entirely. This definitely needs a softer binding and boot, right?

Counter rotation is not bad and it definitely has its place in snowboarding. Many moves can't be made without it, so I would never suggest anyone try to lose it, but it can be made with less effect on the upper body, specifically the arms and shoulders. We like to think of the countering force as coming from the upper abdominals of the core. Rather than resisting or creating the turning force with a movement of the upper body, which can create instability. Think about tensing the abs as something to counter against instead. I mentioned this because you're swinging your arms around and getting caught behind in places.

Yep, I'll keep this in mind. I think, though, that the turning frequency that I'm interested in is something that I can't rely too much on the sidecut to achieve. I'm talking 3-4 turns per second when things get hairy. Yes, this is approaching the turn frequency of skiers on competition mogul courses.

If you were riding a WC mogul course, on a board with no sidecut and not posting on a site where people come to talk about edging in general, I'd agree. As your chosen pitch was less steep, you could emply more edging before the scrub. If you're coming into the scrub too hot because of this, use more edge in the scrub. This would call for more advancement of the board under your core at completion to centre over the back foot for max pressure control. If you try a more edgy scrub with your pivot point still under the front foot, you'll wash.

I totally agree. The snow in the videos was much slower than I am used to, but I was still trying to show the technique I use on faster snow.

Your BoS is your board. Essentially, what you're trying to do to allow your upper body to stay quietly in the fall line during an entire turning cycle (Which youu know). Isolate the countering forces between your upper abdominals and your heel and toe edges. Without strong edging, it's your upper body creating the turning force and not the board, which you paid good money for and might as well use. At this point, you'll probably find that the played, floppy board isn't killing it like you thought it was.

If you're talking about the old Gnu 160 that I wanted to try, that board was quite forgiving on the softer snow. It definitely won't be so nice when the snow gets icy, though.

I think I understand your point about using the core more and shoulders less. I should be putting my quickest inputs into the board utilizing the largest reaction mass possible. Only using my shoulders and arms, I'm leaving out a good sized mass that can be used to provide even more powerful inputs to the board. When I'm not putting the most powerful movements into the board, the larger reaction mass means less flailing. If I have this right, thanks for being patient and explaining this to me!