Board riding

[lowrider]

Good ending to a tense situation. This is what makes for a great forum. It's not about being right or wrong but respecting everyone's opinion.

[lordmetroland]

Not to exhume the corpse, but in searching for input on Bomber Power Plates, I came across a review on Snowboardingforum, with a posted video from a self-identified instructor. He busted the same Crouching Tiger/Child's Pose toe sides as the guys in this video. I ride soft boots. Maybe I have the same form and simply don't know it? Is the frontside carve so intoxicating that one loses all sense of physical awareness? I remember feeling a lot better looking and graceful a long time ago after a handful of martinis...

[canmanski]

Hi All,

I love this thread. Had some good time reading it today.

I'm the slackline video person, Bart.

First of all - thanks for an interesting discussion.

Since a lot of points were stated above, I'm not going to argue them much. But I do want to clarify a few things.

1. Some people referred to "scientific point of view". I'm not a scientist. I'm an engineer (MSc in Robotics, few years in a humanoid robotics lab). There's a subtle difference between engineering and scientific approach. Here's a joke, that explains it well.

An engineer and a scientist stand about 2m away from a ice cold beer. They can drink the beer, if they get close to it. The trick is - that each next step they take must be half of the previous one (ie. 1m, 0.5m, 0.25m).

The scientists just stands there. The engineer takes 3 steps and drinks the beer.

So they ask the scientist, why he did not move. He said that it was a geometric progression, converging 'at the beer', but would require infinite amount of steps.

And when they ask engineer why he took 3 steps and drank the beer, he replied " I was close enough".

So the slackline video takes the engineering approach. It's close enough to snowboarding.

2. As someone noticed I'm not good at walking slackline. If I was any better, I could fake it.

3. The original video in this thread. The riders are skilled, without a doubt. My knees hurt, just by looking at this.

4. xyIA (x = insert country of your choice, y = insert sport of your choice, IA = Instructor Association) is a great business model. Scaleable, repeatable and guaranteed success rate. If I was the king of BongoBongo, the first thing I'd do is start BongoBongo Snowboard Instructor Association to roll in the extra $$$. There are obviously strict rules that apply ie our teaching method it the best, the rest is rubbish etc, etc,... I always have connotations with Richard Dawking's stuff when dealing with xyIA (eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viruses_of_the_Mind)

5. I actually enjoy riding duck, on a true twin tip board, butters, flat tricks etc. I will never understand why anyone would even consider riding duck on a directional board - board specifically designed to be ridden in one direction.

Thanks again. Cheers.

Bart

[slopestar]

I love softboot carving and have spent the last couple years getting better at it. I like the kagayaking videos. Japanese and I believe Korean riders really going after it. More style than anything (sometimes too much style)

I have some snippets of myself on youtube under MrSlopestar...go figure... But these guys, as good as the turns are, are just not pleasing to the eye. It looks like stinkbug carving. But they look like they are having fun and the snow looks like hero-cord.

Both photos here are on a softy carver/not duck...

snippets here and critique welcomed

Edited April 19, 2014 by slopestar

[philw]

Zeno was arguably a philosopher or a mathematician. Bandying terms like those about can smell like "appeal to authority" if we're not careful though.

Snowboard Schools....

Beginners are taught one particular "style", defined in rule books created by BASI and similar organisations. Those books do not define "good snowboarding", rather they describe something which is easy for beginners to learn and for teachers to teach. Almost no advanced riders would use such a style, any more than a track race driver would use the style taught to learner drivers.

I doubt anyone who has become an expert would suffer from that confusion.

Choices..

You can apparently make an Olympic sport of subjectively judging people's riding style, I think they call it "slope style" or ballet or something.

But we aren't constrained like those "freestyle" people are.

At Carving Masters there will be a huge range of styles on show. There will be people on narrow Virus boards who make massive jumps between turns; people on Swoard boards doing euro carves; people on American style big boards making large radius turns; people diving for the snow; rotational and non-rotational styles. You'll see boards from about 15cm up to 28cm wide; materials from glass to metal; pointy-nose or blunt; sidecuts from 8m through 16m; Skwals; 1.5m boards through 2m. YOu may even see some soft boot riders, although you will not be able to easily tell which is which from a distance.

On a particular day I'll chose which style I want to ride, and on which board. I feel no need to tell anyone else to emulate what I'm doing, and I'm not much interested in what the vast majority of riders think of it. Good riders are few and far between, but I'd no more tell Terje that he should ride duck than he would tell me I should ride soft.

I don't feel threatened by duck soft boot riders, waving their arms about and sticking their bums in the air. Sure, it looks a bit funny, but they're they're riding fast and they're using the edge of their boards. That's my sport.

[Corey]

... they're riding fast and they're using the edge of their boards. That's my sport.

Bravo sir, bravo! Well said.

[slopestar]

^^^yes

[b0ardski]

Snowboard Schools....

Beginners are taught one particular "style", defined in rule books created by BASI and similar organisations. Those books do not define "good snowboarding", rather they describe something which is easy for beginners to learn and for teachers to teach. Almost no advanced riders would use such a style, any more than a track race driver would use the style taught to learner drivers.

I doubt anyone who has become an expert would suffer from that confusion.

Choices..

You can apparently make an Olympic sport of subjectively judging people's riding style, I think they call it "slope style" or ballet or something.

But we aren't constrained like those "freestyle" people are.

On a particular day I'll chose which style I want to ride, and on which board. I feel no need to tell anyone else to emulate what I'm doing, and I'm not much interested in what the vast majority of riders think of it. Good riders are few and far between, but I'd no more tell Terje that he should ride duck than he would tell me I should ride soft.

I don't feel threatened by duck soft boot riders, waving their arms about and sticking their bums in the air. Sure, it looks a bit funny, but they're they're riding fast and they're using the edge of their boards. That's my sport.

always identify with your insights Phil

yep. subjective judging, back to "steeze in the eye of the beholder"

I always bring 2-3 different boards to the hill every day and chose a "style" best suited for the snow conditions (they all have the same stepin binders and the flex of my boots is highly adjustable).

it's all about maximizing the fun factor

I love to do bump ballet on a board (a skier who admired my performance the other day called it that) and anyone that can't fathom using poles while snowboarding should come ride with me.

That said, any authorities/instructors that are dual certified (ie ski & board) care to discuss pole plant timing

while going switch

on a board

?????

ps; can't be done duckfoot;)

Edited April 20, 2014 by b0ardski

[Jack M]

Zeno was arguably a philosopher or a mathematician. Bandying terms like those about can smell like "appeal to authority" if we're not careful though.

Snowboard Schools....

Beginners are taught one particular "style", defined in rule books created by BASI and similar organisations. Those books do not define "good snowboarding", rather they describe something which is easy for beginners to learn and for teachers to teach. Almost no advanced riders would use such a style, any more than a track race driver would use the style taught to learner drivers.

I doubt anyone who has become an expert would suffer from that confusion.

Agreed. However I believe that many people never question that style nor the duck stance after that first lesson. I believe snowboard schools and rental shops are setting up beginner riders with a duck stance out of convenience, and not out of service to the customer. I don't believe this is a good way to learn or ride unless equal performance while switch/fakie riding is the goal. When I was teaching we all carried mini-drivers, and would change students' stances appropriately. I never set up a student with a negative rear foot angle.

Choices...(stuff about style snipped)

Agreed again. I'll never tell an obvious expert riding duck that they're doing it wrong. I will tell and have told obvious intermediates they should consider a different stance.

I don't feel threatened by duck soft boot riders, waving their arms about and sticking their bums in the air. Sure, it looks a bit funny, but they're they're riding fast and they're using the edge of their boards. That's my sport.

I don't think anyone has said anything about feeling threatened. Personally I just get frustrated by people posting stuff online with titles like "How to carve on a snowboard" when it's not actually the best way. Whatever, I'm glad those guys are having fun carving their snowboards, hopefully they will inspire other softbooters to feel the carve too. It's just too bad that whoever learns their style will have to eventually unlearn it if they want to go further with alpine snowboarding.

Edited April 22, 2014 by Jack Michaud

[Rob Stevens]

Hi All,

I love this thread. Had some good time reading it today.

I'm the slackline video person, Bart.

First of all - thanks for an interesting discussion.

Since a lot of points were stated above, I'm not going to argue them much. But I do want to clarify a few things.

1. Some people referred to "scientific point of view". I'm not a scientist. I'm an engineer (MSc in Robotics, few years in a humanoid robotics lab). There's a subtle difference between engineering and scientific approach. Here's a joke, that explains it well.

An engineer and a scientist stand about 2m away from a ice cold beer. They can drink the beer, if they get close to it. The trick is - that each next step they take must be half of the previous one (ie. 1m, 0.5m, 0.25m).

The scientists just stands there. The engineer takes 3 steps and drinks the beer.

So they ask the scientist, why he did not move. He said that it was a geometric progression, converging 'at the beer', but would require infinite amount of steps.

And when they ask engineer why he took 3 steps and drank the beer, he replied " I was close enough".

So the slackline video takes the engineering approach. It's close enough to snowboarding.

2. As someone noticed I'm not good at walking slackline. If I was any better, I could fake it.

3. The original video in this thread. The riders are skilled, without a doubt. My knees hurt, just by looking at this.

4. xyIA (x = insert country of your choice, y = insert sport of your choice, IA = Instructor Association) is a great business model. Scaleable, repeatable and guaranteed success rate. If I was the king of BongoBongo, the first thing I'd do is start BongoBongo Snowboard Instructor Association to roll in the extra $$$. There are obviously strict rules that apply ie our teaching method it the best, the rest is rubbish etc, etc,... I always have connotations with Richard Dawking's stuff when dealing with xyIA (eg. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viruses_of_the_Mind)

5. I actually enjoy riding duck, on a true twin tip board, butters, flat tricks etc. I will never understand why anyone would even consider riding duck on a directional board - board specifically designed to be ridden in one direction.

Thanks again. Cheers.

Bart

Sorry folks... Tried to stay out of it, but Bart had to go and drag me back in.

If the experiment is drinking a nice bottle of Pollock, then, for sure, I'd rather perform the experiment, and get a drink, than not at all. If you're going to drink it, though, you might as well pour it into a glass, that just go out of the bottle. What I mean by that, is set up the experiment so you're getting the most out of it.

For example and in the case of the duck stance, I've mentioned the "heels and toes in space" part, but what I noticed in watching it again is that you align your torso to the line. Why are you doing that?

Jack... You're killing me, Bro... You say you're not feeling threatened by something, while earlier saying it's literally "killing the sport". While you're wearing the mantle of Defender of the Faith, I'll ask you; "What are you defending us against?" The "mediocrity" of duck-stance is probably the answer, right? Mike Bray, the mountain-smasher in the video, has chosen this stance as his way to get the most out of his riding experience. Clearly, it's not how you would max out your day on the slopes, but you're looking for something different. How Mike goes down the mountain sure as **** isn't "killing the sport", or mediocre, to his way of doing things.

Further, we've been talking about beginner lessons... We're a long way from the "assembly line" days of turning people away from over-booked group lessons, when snobord'n was the flavour of the day. Most schools are lucky to get a handful of walk-ins a day, where they inevitably turn into privates because no one else booked. From what I see, that has allowed shops and schools to take the time to ask a few more questions, like "What have you done before?" and "What do you want to get out of this? / How do you want to ride?" As the schools I know are run by people with years of teaching under their belts, they know that one size doesn't fit all and that stances can be maximised for the individual and their goals / physiques. That aside, I'll still say duck has some real benefits for making the first turns, mostly surrounding its reducing the heel-to-toe "block" a more forward stance can cause, when rotation to the nose has to be unwound to transition the board to a flat base in a backside turn.

As for a rider adopting the tech in the video for carving, I fail to see how this has to be "un-learned" in order to pick up alpine-style carving. It's just a different method. Being good at one style doesn't stand in the way of dialling the other. If it did, Mike and I would be bad at alpine carving. I assure you, if either of us were back east, with more limited options, we'd be back in hardboots, and in a day likely have "flicked the switch".

You'd be right not to say anything to an expert who's made thier choice, as they got to where they are by experience. Like with me, you'd have an argument on your hands. When it comes to your intermediate who you would, with a certain degree of prejudice, steer away from a viable option, you are limiting their legitimate choices, solely based on your own anecdotal experiences.

I'll say it again, and not, for all your sakes, repeat myself again on this... I ride this stance because it works for my build. If I stand with my feet straight and flex down, my knees come together. I am "knock-knee'd". Taking this into account, I'll look at my equipment and try to set it up to make a couple of things happen;

1) I want my front knee to work as more across the board, from edge-to-edge. Most of my direction input starts with the lead foot, so I want it to move that way. Set up? Angled front foot.

2) By the time I'm apexing or moving to the switch, I'm focused on pressure control, and, as I'm advancing the board under me as I go through the turn, this tends to be more back foot centric. Because I'm knock-knee'd, I have my binding angled slightly to the tail, so my knee movement is equalled out along the edge... I have as much ability to pressure the tail as I do the nose, and a flexing of the knee won't cause weight to move forward, when I'd otherwise want the "default" to be centred.

Neil G said this was "hardly quacking!" He's right. I'm not so knock-knee'd that I feel I need too much ducking out. At about -3, the inside of my baseplate is at 90 degrees to the long length of the board, creating a straight line from my heel to my big toe.

Back when I was riding alpine exclusively, my high back foot angles would actually have my back knee collapsing behind and occasionally inside my front knee! That wasn't what I was looking for. For me, I'd have as low a rear angle as I could, and try to maintain balance between not booting out, while keeping in mind to not be so flat-angled as to lose the deep carve equalizing benefits of the alpine stance.

Maybe what people might want to try is having a few good, deep bends. If your knees come together with 0 - 0 foot angles, a few degrees of duck (for softboot freeriding, or more splay in your alpine stance) might be comfortable. If the opposite is true, where at 0 -0 your knees track straight (or go bow-legged), you might want to set yourself up like Terj.

[Neil Gendzwill]

Maybe what people might want to try is having a few good, deep bends. If your knees come together with 0 - 0 foot angles, a few degrees of duck (for softboot freeriding, or more splay in your alpine stance) might be comfortable. If the opposite is true, where at 0 -0 your knees track straight (or go bow-legged), you might want to set yourself up like Terj.

Rob, why does it need to be duck? Let's separate the concepts of "splay", the difference in angle between front and rear and "duck", which to me is when the back foot has a negative angle and the front positive. You can have splay without duck in a soft-boot setup and it seems to me that splay is what needs adjusting for individual leg mechanics.

Let's expand your experiment. Stand with your feet at right angles to a straight line on the floor with the line crossing under the middle of the arch, at your normal stance width apart. Then do a knee bend. When I do that, I can feel my knees complaining, they would like to track out but the foot angle is interfering. If I add equal splay into a duck stance, they are more comfy. Now keeping the same width and the line still under the arch, rotate the feet into an alpine stance with equal angles, ie the feet are still parallel to each other. Now knee bend again. When I do that, my knees complain less and I don't need to add as much splay to be completely comfortable.

So for me and I expect most people, a forward stance needs less splay to accomodate the mechanics of my knees and ankles.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Neil Gendzwill

[Rob Stevens]

Neil - For freeriding on soft boots, I'm not going to turn my back foot forward. Again, it's a case of my physiology, combined with what I want to do on the board and how I want my rear knee to track across its length (perpendicular). If I were setting up a board where carving was the focus, it would be both feet forward because equalizing the hip action both toe and heel is the goal. The splay would be worked out as I went, because it's been awhile since I last did it, but I definitely take in what you're saying.

Please know that I don't say the above as a challenge to hardboot freeriders, who may like to do it all in the kind of stance I'd reserve for alpine... That's just a presonal preference of mine.

SBS - Word.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Rob Stevens

[BlueB]

Interesting discussion, SBS...

It is really questionable, what really happened... Back in the days of skis only, we had Nordic and Alpine. The later implied riding the mountain, irrespective if racing, bashing the moguls or trees, chasing the pow, or just cruising the groomers... In the late 70' the "hot dog" craze came along, wich could be considered the beggining of "freestyle". Fast forward to snowboarding. We were pretty much all the one, until the distinct rise of the Freestyle and media starting to push it more and more. Suddenly, the non-freestyle and non-racing things were called Freeride, with the Alpine stigma being attached to the hard boot, forward stance type of rider. I'm not too convinced that hard booters hi-jacked the Alpine name, or just accepted the label attached to them...

Anyways, what am I when I ride the hard boots (actually ski boots, oh horror!) on my freeride board, in +25/-5 duck stance? Or, when I jump the biggest tabletop in our park on full race setup?

Peace.

[softbootsurfer]

as you said Blu B "I'm not too convinced that hard booters hi-jacked the Alpine name, or just accepted the label attached to them..."

Who cares where and how it came about ? It is a real slap in the face to so many Pioneers of our Sport...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_skiing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_snowboarding

Edited April 26, 2014 by softbootsailer
Alcohol intolerance

[Rob Stevens]

Alpine snowboarding only happens above the treeline.

[slopestar]

I think the waving arms and stink bug style are the obvious detractors of the video we are all referring to. Lets not forget that... The guys are making amazing turns but the style is awkward and its because of a "ducked-out" stance. I love watching riders who rip and I would undoubtedly be hooting from a chairlift if either of these guys passed underneath. It's awkward and hindered. Rockered boards are playful but not carve oriented. Love the edge work but the stink bug needs an exterminator. Sorry. Check out a Ryan Knapton video on you tube. The guy shreds/ and rides mainly cambered boards. Camber=power...

[Rob Stevens]

I think the waving arms and stink bug style are the obvious detractors of the video we are all referring to. Lets not forget that... The guys are making amazing turns but the style is awkward and its because of a "ducked-out" stance. I love watching riders who rip and I would undoubtedly be hooting from a chairlift if either of these guys passed underneath. It's awkward and hindered. Rockered boards are playful but not carve oriented. Love the edge work but the stink bug needs an exterminator. Sorry. Check out a Ryan Knapton video on you tube. The guy shreds/ and rides mainly cambered boards. Camber=power...

I can see that with the toeside... They don't have to stand like that, but they do. I look at it like standing in a really "soul" arched position. It can be super-stable, until it's not. Crunched down in a ball like that, you have some great pressure, but don't go "off-roading".

It's Mike's heelside that really seems special... I've never seen someone get so much edge angle, in that stance and have the hip mobility to pull off a forward-facing torso, as opposed to being overly sideways, like can happen when you're really low-angled... The dreaded "toilet stance".

So what I'd like to know is what anyone out there feels the observable differences between the lowest part of Mike's heel turn and one done in an alpine stance? Other than the fact that you can see his back knee, I really have a hard time finding fault with his overall body position... It looks very stylish to me! As for the arm-waving, I only see Tom doing that, so for future discussion, I'll again say that I'm only talking about Mike.

Edit... Just watched the Ryan Knapton video, titled: "How to really, really, really, carve your snowboard". He's claiming it! Anyhow, he butters like a champ! 5's out? Talent. What I don't see is softboot carving of a kind better than what I'm used to seeing in that stance... A typical soul-arch toeside, with no real bend to the front knee (that's one thing the boys in the vid I posted do... They're pressuring the front half of the edge in a way that scares most people on soft boards) and not much happening on the heels out of the ordinary. If you compare Mike's heelside to Ryan's, they're not even close... Mike is waaaaay lower and more open in the torso, facing the nose in a way that lends rotational "style" to it. I'm looking at your avatar, there Slopestar, and you've got more going on than Ryan. You also appear to be running a very low rear foot angle, as I see your rear knee sticking up like Mike's (not a "error", or fault, to my way of thinking... It's just the way it needs to be). If that's not the case and you're in an alpine stance to do that, I'd have to ask what difference, if any, you see between your body position and Mike's?

Edited April 26, 2014 by Rob Stevens

[lordmetroland]

I rode Loveland today and was cruising to the base area and stopped to unstrap (I'm on a 200 Hazelwood, softboots in +21/+9 angles) and a 30+ year-old guy carrying a snowboard comes up to me and says, "Do you skate?" I told him I did and he says, "I thought so. I race skateboard downhill in the south and I'm trying snowboarding. Do you know how to adjust these bindings, 'cos they're killing me." He had a rental board that had been set up with about a +15/-15 stance. I suggested that, as a longboard racer, he ought to at least try both positive angles. He went off to adjust the bindings. I later switched to a 170 LibTech with +18/-6 angles and get stopped by a 15 year old girl at the top of the hill. She says, "Can you switch this board to regular?" Again, it's a rental board with about a +15/-15 stance and she had noob written all over her. Once we determined which end was the tip of the board, I set her up at +15/0 and suggested she give it a go.

I have NEVER been asked for tech help on the hill in my 20+ years of riding and it happens twice today. Both nubians, both with angles that aren't working. And one who clearly knew it wasn't right for him. Laziness or dogmatism in the rental shop? Not sure which. But thought it was kind of interesting, given the thread we've been weaving here.

When it comes to stance angles, I started experimenting with a duck stance last year for the first time because I'd never had a board that was wide enough to accommodate it without going like +35/-35, which may be less duck and more hieroglyphic. Once I got the LibTech ultrawide, I gave it a shot. This is after about 20 years of running about +35/+25 in softboots (and about two forgettable years in hardboots). The funny thing is I don't notice a whole lot of difference going from +21/+9 to +18/-6. I also don't have a good wine palate, so I may just not be very sensitive to differences (the place I really notice a difference is when I don't detune a board. Learned that lesson recently), but duck vs. positive? Not so much. Maybe it's a product of having learned and ridden my first 100+ days on an impossibly unresponsive and crap setup that everything else now seems magical, regardless of the stance?

[slopestar]

Rob,

You are so right. He slays it heelside. Toeside is actually pretty nice too.

my point with Knapton is his style is pleasing and he still carves a turn. Not a gouging turn but a carve with style.

I really have fun watching these videos too. Too many to list/ Not my favorite but an example...

[philw]

I'm not playing in the main game here, but on a side point...

The Knapton video is a good example of decent riding you'll see from good people all the time. Most of my mates ride soft gear, and they can carve as well as I or this guy can, and strangely we all kind of look the same doing it, although the gear is radically different. Note that he completely ignores BASI orthodoxy by twisting to face down the hill (1:25 or so). We know it makes sense.

The other video demonstrates the arm waving style again, like the early style parodied by Knapton. Knapton shows that it's not necessary to ride that way on modern soft gear, but this second video makes me wonder if it's not an approach forced on people by their gear/ stance/ training

[BlueB]

Alpine snowboarding only happens above the treeline.

Rob, that's hilarious! :D

It shows us how definition and meaning of a word can vary on context and the speaker, as well ad the prevailing mind set of the listener.

Maybe after all, the Alpine snowboarding is what a current prevailing understanding of that word means? We do not have Nordic anyhow, so Alpine could mean different thing then in skiing (in despite that I always promoted that skiing and snowboarding are the disciplines of the same sport).

SBS, a slap to someone's face? I'd say that's a bit over sensitive... Especially if the term wta imposed onto har boot riding, rather then hi-jacked... Anyhow, I don't quite think that Terje and Co. care at all...

The Wiki entry you referred to says something like "It is typically practiced with hard plastic shelled boots called "hardboots" and carving or race-oriented snowboards. Loosely, it is the pursuit of snowboarding mostly on the ground, in the forward direction, with the primary goal of making clean, smooth turns. " the key word here is "typically" which is not exclusive. You'd definitely fall under Alpine mantle ;) You are at home, Brother.

[lowrider]

as you said Blu B "I'm not too convinced that hard booters hi-jacked the Alpine name, or just accepted the label attached to them..."

Who cares where and how it came about ? It is a real slap in the face to so many Pioneers of our Sport...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_skiing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpine_snowboarding

Reminds me of Glen Plake in the Warren Millar flicks describing the advent of Extreme skiing . Just good skiers doing their thing but they had to be labeled "Extreme."

[softbootsurfer]

Yea, I am Sensitive :o sorry

But I believe This current Definition that list Seal as a Participant but fails to mention Sims, Burton, Bauer or C Kelly to name a few, is just plain not nice

or does Alpine Snowboarding have a history not worth mentioning ?

Edited April 27, 2014 by softbootsailer
softer

[lonbordin]

Yea, I am Sensitive :o sorry

But I believe This current Definition that list Seal as a Participant but fails to mention Sims, Burton, Bauer or C Kelly to name a few, is just plain not nice

or does Alpine Snowboarding have a history not worth mentioning ?

You know you can edit that, right?

...

[b0ardski]

been calling it "alpine" for almost 30 yrs.

When people ask "what is that" I say "a snowboard" that's never good enough, they ask "what do you call it?" I say alpine style, the gear is like what olympic racers use.

I'm not sure where I 1st heard hardboots and high forward angles called Alpine, but ski/mountaineering boots with both feet pointing in the direction of travel in the mid 80s had way more similarity to alpine skiing than sorels & straps at low angles, so the moniker makes sense.

Burt & Zellers were the 1st real alpine boarders I ever saw in the late 80s and the "heroes" I tried to emulate. before that it was Sylvain Saudan & Scott Schmidt

not sure when fakie became switch either, but it's just an agreed upon label to define style.

Defining style is like trying to grab a handful of water...

Edited April 28, 2014 by b0ardski