Sweat The Technique: The Root Cause of Ugly (Free) Riding?

[That Guy...]

with -15/+15, progression means heelside bulldozing the snow off steep slopes under the lift

I like to make S turns inside bulldozer tracks "just to piss'em off"

 

Some of my favorite people to ride with are skiers, and they're always lightheartedly busting my chops about being just another damn jibber ruining the mountain.  I joke back, "Don't make me go get the Coiler.  I swear to god, I will get my 196cm Coiler out and while you're at work all week, I'll be going sideways down all your favorite powder fields from first to last chair."

Edited April 28, 2015 by That Guy...

[philw]

I included the section below because I like it, not that Burton need my assistance. I never owned a Burton Alpine board - I didn't like the aesthetics of their Asyms and by the time they learned about proper race board design other people were doing it better.

 

But Jake (who is a rider) has a successful company, and it's not made by trying to tell the world what to use, rather it's about giving them what they want. Accessibility would appear to be a good place to start.

 

But otherwise, Burton powder boards went crazy for a while during the reverse-camber years, but we're through that now and the Burton Landlord (for example) looks a lot like a Malolo with a de-cambered nose. I read the Kessler patent on that design... perhaps it's something racing fed back into more mainstream snowboarding.

 

Another try:

• People like Ryan on here demonstrate than younger riders using any gear can ride quickly and with style.
   
• More accessible gear means more less-athletic people can try the sport. Most of them will ride badly and give up. These are people who would otherwise not be here, they don't replace the good riders, they're just here too. 

In summary I suspect there are probably just as many good snowboarders around now as there were back in 1995. There are a lot more bad snowboarders around, but so what?

 

 

... As much as people like to crap on Burton, they're the one major surviving snowboard-specific company that always made a wide range of boards for different riding styles (their abandoning of the alpine market notwithstanding, but that could easily be an entirely separate thread); Burton is the company that ran this perfect ad back in 1995:

 

And despite all the industry trends, Burton is the one mainstream snowboard company that's still making a selection of fully-cambered snowboard models. Naturally they need to make what sells best, but they're run by a core group of dedicated riders who know what really works best and will continue to produce boards for more advanced riders. (I'm convinced that they left the alpine market in part because they knew there were specialist companies like Prior, Coiler, and Donek who could serve the needs of alpine riders better.) That rental Custom Flying V notwithstanding -- they do still make the traditional cambered Custom and Custom X as well....

 

[Vizman]

I think part of the problem is that most people don't get to experience anything other than soft boot, rocker set ups now and so don't know what it feels like to be able to confidently to hold an edge and hence don't even realise they are missing something.

 

We were almost better off in the early 90s when for most (at least in Europe) the first snowboarding experience generally involved ski boots and plate bindings. At least this gave people the experience of what it is to hold an edge and even carve a little. From there people made their choice to either go down the soft or hard boots route.  Winter 92/93 I was lucky enough to be working a season in Morzine, France, and spent a lot of time up at Avoriaz, which was already embracing the snowboard 'revolution'.  The fantastic thing at that time was that on the mountain there was probably an equal split of soft and hard boot set ups, in fact there may have been more of the later as most lessons were taught in hard boots. Anyone wanting to take up the sport either as a newbie or transitioning from skiing could try out a variety of set ups. Looking back I realise it was a hard boaters heaven (though never would have seen it as that, because at the time they simply existed in equal measure alongside soft boots), I could hire a Burton 5 one day, an Oxbow the next and then a K2 or Hot the day after (and all asyms of course!). And then if you wanted you could do the same with a variety of soft boot set ups.

 

So people had much more choice both in terms of the equipment they could hire and the type of boarding they saw out on the slopes. And I think that latter point is very important. These days most people just don't get to see much variety of technique or equipment.

 

For me it was a no brainer. I tried soft boots for an hour and couldn't stand the lack of edge control and so went out and bought myself a pair of UPS boots and began my carving journey.

 

Another point I notice, as someone who is returning after a prolonged absence is that there used to be what I would call a 'middle ground' of hard boot riding technique that lay between the 0 degree or duck foot soft boot stance and the steeper angles that were starting to develop in the racing community, but I struggle to find much about it now.  Early on I remember trying some stiffer boards and steeper binding angles but it didn't work for me and so settled I down with to an Oxbow asym and more mellow binding angles, probably something like 30/15 and had a blast.  From what I can see this middle ground of hard boot riding seems to have disappeared somewhat. Is that true?  

 

I know the technique differed from racing technique and am sure I read somewhere on the Carvers Almanac that it was a European style that eventually fell by the wayside as racing/ extreme carving techniques took hold but I can't find that article anymore.  It definitely emphasised it as developed by European riders and I think one of the main difference was the direction of the shoulders.

 

Any how, I guess the main points I making here is that this thread has helped me realise a) how lucky I was to have my formative years of snowboarding back then when there was so much more choice available and much less pressure to go in any particular direction and b) how much healthier the sport was in terms of diversity in comparison to now. These days everything seems to be drowned out by what I would call the 'Red Bull' view of life, i.e what ever it is, just do it bigger, faster, bolder and higher, regardless of how dangerous or how lacking in aesthetics it is, which is a pity. But hopefully people will tire of that and the love of something more graceful (yet just as powerful) will return. Here's hoping . .  :-) 

Edited April 28, 2015 by Vizman

[b0ardski]

I think part of the problem is that most people don't get to experience anything other than soft boot, rocker set ups now and so don't know what it feels like to be able to confidently to hold an edge and hence don't even realise they are missing something.

 

We were almost better off in the early 90s when for most (at least in Europe) the first snowboarding experience generally involved ski boots and plate bindings. At least this gave people the experience of what it is to hold an edge and even carve a little. From there people made their choice to either go down the soft or hard boots route.  Winter 92/93 I was lucky enough to be working a season in Morzine, France, and spent a lot of time up at Avoriaz, which was already embracing the snowboard 'revolution'.  The fantastic thing at that time was that on the mountain there was probably an equal split of soft and hard boot set ups, in fact there may have been more of the later as most lessons were taught in hard boots. Anyone wanting to take up the sport either as a newbie or transitioning from skiing could try out a variety of set ups. Looking back I realise it was a hard boaters heaven, I could hire a Burton 5 one day, an Oxbow the next and then a K2 or Hot the day after (and all asyms of course!). You could also do the same with a variety of soft boot set ups.

 

So people had much more choice both in terms of the equipment they could hire and the type of boarding they saw out on the slopes. And I think that latter point is very important. These days most people just don't get to see much variety of technique or equipment.

 

For me it was a no brainer. I tried soft boots for an hour and couldn't stand the lack of edge control and so went out and bought myself a pair of UPS boots and began my carving journey.

 

Any how, I guess the main point I making here is that this thread has helped me realise how lucky I was to have my first experience of snowboarding back then when there was so much more choice available and much less pressure to go in any particular direction, but also you could say how much healthier the sport was in terms of diversity. These days everything seems to be drowned out by what I would call the 'Red Bull' view of life, i.e what ever it is, just do it bigger, faster, bolder higher and regardless of how dangerous or how lacking in aesthetics it is, which is a pity. But hopefully people will tire of that and the love of something more graceful (yet just as powerful) will return. Here's hoping . .  :-) 

 

Thanks for the reminder to count my lucky stars that I got to experience everything from bent plywood with rubber straps & fins, to both wide (kemper bullet) & skinny (factory prime) race boards including asyms to big powder boats and was in no way limited to laces, straps, duck & rocker like today's beginners.

 

The pink & black UPS's were my 1st snowboard specific hardboots too.

Edited April 28, 2015 by b0ardski

[lordmetroland]

In summary I suspect there are probably just as many good snowboarders around now as there were back in 1995. There are a lot more bad snowboarders around, but so what?

I don't think there is a "so what," at least not for me. I simply noticed there were lots of capable snowboarders (i.e., they could get down the hill) without much in the way of flow or style or edge control, which got me thinking about the "why." (Granted, it does drive me nuts to watch snowboarders road grade the soft snow off the slopes that are too steep for their ability, but I can't be too harsh with 6/7 year old daughters who aren't exactly gentle on the snow) I think my point is that it seems that these alleged equipment advances may have robbed people of the exhilaration of on-edge turns and they don't even know what they're missing! I thought I knew what I was doing until my Donek showed me otherwise.

 

Now, I will say that, if I'm spending 70% of my resort time on the lift, I'd rather be watching people who are either really bad or really good, so maybe there is something self-serving about this thread. I can't deny a certain thrill of watching someone from the lift who's really skilled at getting down the hill, no matter the mode. It's better than video because you can't hold on to it; it's there, then it's gone. And it sure makes the lift ride seem shorter.

[Rob Stevens]

Only a certain percentage of the snobord population have the drive to improve, to the point where they're impressive to the knowledgable onlooker. All the rest will look... Weak.

This doesn't mean the industry blew it. The equipment is out there, in greater availability than ever, if you want it. Not many people truly strive for excellence, and for those that do, excellence is more broadly defined than it once was.

Don't try and force someone elses happy experience into a box, so you can diminish it.

[philw]

I think snowboarding has been deliberately marketed as a snow sport which avoids being something you have to put 10,000 hours into. It's what skiing would have been if it'd been invented in the 1980s. It's something holiday makers can do once a year. So tThe snowboarding "snowplough" is sideslipping merrily on your jib board, and it's apparently "cool".

 

The people who do that don't want to put in 10,000 hours.

 

Personally I find people who can't be bothered to learn how to turn (in a swimming pool or on a board), different from me, but if they didn't exist I could not have the satisfaction of being better than them. I reckon we need more of them and fewer of me, then I can rule all. Ha ha ha...

[Vizman]

Thanks for the reminder to count my lucky stars that I got to experience everything from bent plywood with rubber straps & fins, to both wide (kemper bullet) & skinny (factory prime) race boards including asyms to big powder boats and was in no way limited to laces, straps, duck & rocker like today's beginners.

 

 

You're welcome! (assuming you're not being sarcastic, that is! I have to ask, I'm British, we put sarcasm everywhere) 

 

I loved my UPS boots, though sadly no longer have them.

 

 

I can't deny a certain thrill of watching someone from the lift who's really skilled at getting down the hill, no matter the mode. It's better than video because you can't hold on to it; it's there, then it's gone. And it sure makes the lift ride seem shorter.

 

 

Absolutely. It's magical when you see someone with technique that you admire. I instantly then want to go and hunt them down on the mountain and see more.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Vizman

[Corey]

Vizman - check out Pureboarding. They emphasize lower angles in their freeriding.

To the original topic: I think most people just don't care. They snowboard because it's fun, even at a beginner level. When I go bowling* (once every few years with friends), I don't really care if I'm doing it right. If I get a couple strikes, I'm happy. I bet some bowling purists scoff at my style. Many skiers/riders are just having fun with no concern for what anyone else thinks.

* 5-pin bowling, of course. Canadians like small balls.

It's very true that some simple tips would help them as much as they'd help my bowling game, but it's not a concern for many. What I find more aggravating are those that want to learn but can't get past their own egos. I've had students in auto race schools that were too busy talking about how awesome they were to hear anything I said. Their last lap of the day looked exactly like their first lap. I hope they at least had fun, because they didn't learn much!

There's a local guy that does 'unique' Wedeln-type turns on a snowboard. He's crouched way down with his hands on opposite sides of the board just barely off the snow, alternating which hand drags, but never tips the board up more than 10-degrees from flat. It's very weird-looking, and would probably kill him if he did it anywhere other than here in the land of 300' vert as he doesn't really control his speed. He's having a blast and is pumped about snowboarding.

[Neil Gendzwill]

I'm probably as guilty of it as the next guy, but the smugness level in this thread is off the charts.  Yeah, most of us who hang out here turn pretty well, but does it really matter in the overall scheme of things?  Everyone has fun in their own way.

[lordmetroland]

I'm probably as guilty of it as the next guy, but the smugness level in this thread is off the charts.  Yeah, most of us who hang out here turn pretty well, but does it really matter in the overall scheme of things?  Everyone has fun in their own way.

I don't think it does matter. My conservative estimate is that 95% of the people on this forum probably turn better than me (and look better doing it), so I don't have much to be smug over. I'm just wondering if the equipment "advances" of the past decade have had the unintentional consequence of plateauing many riders' abilities. I'm not trying to quash anyone's idea of fun on the hill. Unless they're hangboarding. Or on one of those snowbikes. Even then, I don't really care, I just simply don't understand it, the snowbike thing.

[markbvt]

I was about to say... I'd take an SV over any inline any day of the week.  I keep wondering why I don't have an SV in my fleet yet.  It's like, the Miata of motorcycles; any question that starts with "which bike would be good for..." is always answered with "SV."  

 

SVs are great bikes, no doubt, but there are plenty of questions starting with that to which an SV would NOT be the answer. For example: "…riding single-track through the woods," or "…riding hundreds of miles of loose gravel on the Trans-Labrador Highway." Even "…comfortably touring the backroads of the Appalachians for a week."

 

But for general purpose street riding and commuting, yeah, I've recommended SVs to quite a few people.

 

 

I included the section below because I like it, not that Burton need my assistance. I never owned a Burton Alpine board - I didn't like the aesthetics of their Asyms and by the time they learned about proper race board design other people were doing it better.

 

That's exactly right. Burton's R&D was focused on the boards that sold in greater numbers, for obvious reasons. They had a few standouts in the Factory Prime lineup (the '97 FP 5.7-180s was a terrific board; I still have one), but for the most part, their alpine boards were far behind what companies like Prior were making. I only learned recently that Burton contracted Prior to make custom race boards for their racers such as Mark Fawcett, but it explains a lot. By the late '90s Burton obviously already realized that their race boards wouldn't be competitive; I'm actually impressed that they kept making alpine boards for as long as they did.

 

I demoed a few later-model FPs and Ultra Primes at the time and was never impressed with any of them. By that time I was riding a Mistral Sonic 167, which was a super fun board that held an edge incredibly well and felt very responsive; it was an interesting design with a huge amount of camber. By comparison, Burton alpine boards of the time were wider and flatter and just felt sluggish and a little lifeless.

 

In retrospect, I feel like Burton gave the alpine market their best shot and continued to try to support it long after it made financial sense for them to do so, but eventually they had to concede that the small custom builders were doing a much better job with it.

 

--mark

[Vizman]

Vizman - check out Pureboarding. They emphasize lower angles in their freeriding.

 

 

 

Thanks, I have come across them, but I'll look into it in more detail.

 

 

I'm probably as guilty of it as the next guy, but the smugness level in this thread is off the charts.  Yeah, most of us who hang out here turn pretty well, but does it really matter in the overall scheme of things?  Everyone has fun in their own way.

 

Apologies if anything said comes across as smug, it's not meant that way.  Am just genuinely interested in the topic under discussion.

[That Guy...]

SVs are great bikes, no doubt, but there are plenty of questions starting with that to which an SV would NOT be the answer. For example: "…riding single-track through the woods," or "…riding hundreds of miles of loose gravel on the Trans-Labrador Highway." Even "…comfortably touring the backroads of the Appalachians for a week."

 

But for general purpose street riding and commuting, yeah, I've recommended SVs to quite a few people.

 

 

For the offroad stuff, there is the DL line, which are more or less the same bike with some "adventure" bits on them.  If there is any doubt of the platform's off piste capability, I offer this as a reference.  :)

http://supermotojunkie.com/showthread.php?88535-fernley-vet-national-and-GP-pics

[Corey]

I just simply don't understand it, the snowbike thing.

I want to try one, but couldn't fathom missing a day of alpine to rent one and learn it.

Disclaimer: I tried and bought a Skwal. :)

[markbvt]

For the offroad stuff, there is the DL line, which are more or less the same bike with some "adventure" bits on them.  

 

Yeah, I owned a DL650 (aka Wee-Strom) for 40,000 miles. Good bike for touring, but still crap off pavement. I know because I rode it over those hundreds of miles of Labrador gravel. I rode the same stretch a couple of years later on the bike I replaced the Strom with, a Triumph Tiger 800 XC, and it was a night and day difference. The Strom is a streetbike tarted up with a 19" front wheel and upright riding position. The Tiger is actually in many ways a better off-pavement bike than my Honda XR650L, and ate up those gravel miles with confidence.

 

Sure, you could ride the Trans-Lab (or a woods trail) on an SV, but it's more fun when you use the right tool for the job.

 

Sorry for the thread hijack, but that guy started it…. :D

 

--mark

Edited April 28, 2015 by markbvt

[Jack M]

I blame wide duck stances, too-short sidecuts, and profiles that aren't majority camber.

 

Since duck has taken over (for whatever reasons, rental shops for one), fewer and fewer snowboarders make the sport look good anywhere outside of a park or pipe (or even there).  And they can't even tell you why they use that stance.

 

Few riders make skiers say "I want to do THAT."

 

3 of us had a softbooter friend on a trip.  We took him off his Never Summer fs board with duck stance, rocker-camber-rocker-camber-rocker profile, and put him on a metal Coiler BX with back foot at 0 (he wouldn't let us go further), and lo and behold, mind = blown.

[slopestar]

I always love seeing good riders, good skiers, good tele-skiers, good snow bladers, whatever... Style does count and that is a good thing. So is mass marketing. We have all done this long enough regardless of our favorite discipline to be open to the various ways to get down the mountain. I struggle most with the snot nosed, lib tech park rat that swears his duck stance that favors switch riding more than his natural stance that has 4-5 seasons under his belt and touts magne-gimic and banana hammock as the best thing ever. This kid is not open to try anything. Not open to style but is all about the steez. Just the blatant disregard for anything. The straightliner...

I followed a few mutual friends at Mammoth for some gondola laps. Top to bottom and they were fast. Faster than me when it comes to top to bottom as I'm usually turning and burning instead of the speed and skid that these two had mastered, but when it came down to it and I was comfortable with pointing it more than laying deep arcs again... my years of riding and diverse equipment knowledge came into play. I was able to still lay large and confident turns going faster than they were and in greater control. It was the pursuit of becoming a better rider all these years that was painfully obvious even to my friends. I let them lead the first two top to bottom runs and then showed them what their banana pickle rocker magnegimic was doing for them...

It was hindering them....

Edited April 28, 2015 by slopestar

[Chouinard]

[b0ardski]

snowbikes are great fun, super easy on blue groomers and a real challenge on steep offpiste,

I shunned the the little snowblades some makers expected you to use, training wheels, It's like wearing rollerblades on a bicycle.

it takes your weight off the edges thereby preventing a proper carve. foot pegs fore and aft are best for shifting weight between the front and back skis.

finding a resort that'll let you take them up the lift might be tough.

Edited April 29, 2015 by b0ardski

[west carven]

howdy lordmetroland

there is no such thing as "ulgy freeriding" everyone who is on the mountain has a right to be there

and everyone is at a different level at a different time on any given day. as for equipment it doesn't

matter what you ride it's how you ride it. i've seen people suck on a kessler and rip on an old rossi.

i would never diss anyone on the mountain because they are up there doing it at their best ability

and most importantly they are having fun, but i do diss people for not going up the mountain. i was

30 when i started snowboarding and i try to get better everytime i'm on snow. i am far from what i

would call a good rider, so maybe to you i am an "ulgy freerider", but if i was so good then maybe

it is time to retire...

[Beckmann AG]

There are a lot more bad snowboarders around, but so what?

… but does it really matter in the overall scheme of things?

I don't think it does matter.

 

 

Concerns as started this thread only matter if one takes the long view, and considers the snowsports industry as an 'ecosystem', rather than a place to periodically dump spare cash while harvesting adrenaline and/or other chemicals.

The question is, do you let the system run to failure, or do you make a rational attempt to help it recover…?

The latter, of course, involves some clear-eyed and objective examination of how we got to where we are at present.

Pointing the finger at questionably trendy hardgoods and adherents to same is a symptomatic evaluation of a systemic problem.  

---

 

I'm not trying to quash anyone's idea of fun on the hill.

 

Obviously, nobody should be told how to go about having fun.  That’s selfish, and possibly arrogant.

 

Yet, when manufacturers heavily skew their production toward one end of the market, when rental agencies hand out androgynous vanilla product, and when the teaching establishment insists on ‘one stance to rule them all’; the end user is, in fact, told how to go about having their fun.

 

Of course, it’s easier to control and profit from the market, once you constrain and define the parameters of

...someone else’s happy experience...

such that it will fit

...into a box...

of your own design.

 

[Rob Stevens]

The system cannot run to failure. It's snowboarding, and therefore immune to failure. As long as there's the snow, there's the boardin'.

 

The features of modern gear, mentioned off the top, can't be the root cause of "Ugly" freeriding. The OP's three examples of "style", who came up in the heyday of shit gear, are proof of that.

 

Boards that make it easier to learn? This can't possibly be a problem. AASI or CASI (or, insert another national body of your choice) over-complicating things? 99% of lessons are to beginners. If they can pull off a few turns by the end, mission accomplished. If not, they might not be back. Big deal. Duck stance? FFS.. Back when I started, there were two stances. Goof and reg. Angles? My first sleigh came out pre-mounted at 0 and 45 degrees, set up reg. I was goofy. Screw it, I said, and 30+ years later can turn left and right in a way some might consider pretty alright.

 

The things mentioned as limiting factors in progression never held back anyone who really strives to be good. Those dedicated types will always be around to progress this sport, which has only become more amazing every season.

[philw]

... Pointing the finger at questionably trendy hardgoods and adherents to same is a symptomatic evaluation of a systemic problem.   ..

Complaining about new things is "symptomatic" of being over about 35, I'd say. That's a problem you can't cure.

 

There's no "systemic" problem in the snow sports industry because there is no system.

Rather it is an industry which exists to serve a market.

 

For example: Rear entry ski boots came and went as a result of simple market forces, not because of any system or plan.

 

 

Who Defines Ugliness?

I do agree that much in snowboarding is aesthetically ugly. I'm reminded of the poster here who reported that a kid had said to him" "but why would you want to do that". The "that" was diving for the snow in a turn whilst sticking your arse in the air. The kid could see that this is a "trick", and he presumably found it not particularly elegant. Who is to say that kid is wrong but the guys with their arses in the air are right?

 

Cause & Effect

Blaming "style" on gear is putting cause and effect the wrong way around. If you want to dive for the snow, so you find gear which helps you do that. It's nonsense to suggest that people are forced to ride with their bums in the air because they can only buy boards which work that way.

 

Bottom Line

I think some people are trying to define what is "good", then whining when other people fail to ride that way.

 

Snowboarding would not have started at all if people like me had any respect for that sort of approach.

[pmorita]

Things seem to be getting a bit heavy here.  I don't think anyone is saying that people that ride poorly should be excluded (except many old guy skiers).  The way I read the opening thread was that there is a theory about why people that ride for a while don't get more stylish.  Not sure how we got into motorcycle comparisons but I have really enjoyed hearing what people think about how to improve this 'issue'.  Don't we all want to help people ride under the chair and get hooted at?

 

As an aside, I had rear entry ski boots as a kid and they were way cool.  My brother had Hansens with the Neoprene liners and I had San Marcos with a  buckle that ran around the back.  It was a cool fad while it lasted. Kind of like Flow bindings.