JJ Anderson Gold

[lonbordin]

1 hour ago, crote123 said:

Check out the plate...  Interesting that he has F2 CNC up front and the regular in the back.

Not springs but ???

How does this have 102 views and only 6 thumbs up at the time of this comment?!?  Sad. 

Thanks for posting @crote123! 

[BlueB]

10 hours ago, Jack Michaud said:

Frankly I believe it is due to that he carves more and better than most others, IMO.  It is usually only a mistake or recovery move when he lets his left hand get behind him.  His style and technique is the gold standard.  Many other racers seem too sideways to me, and seem to rely too much on slide-lock turns. 

Also, experience matters.  His body knows what to do in more emergency situations without him having to think about it.

I like Jack's post a lot, it partially sums up what's wrong with racing. But I'll elaborate more: 

1) The jumpy style that we see, could mean either, or both, the courses are not set quite right, the boards are not built with the right spec to promote the carvy style, or... the athletes/coaches have evolved away from the most efficient technique; 

2) JJA does have  a carvy style that should be very fast. Now, the younger guys should have physical advantage. If they don't beat him, that means they probably ride with inferior technique; 

3) The courses are monotonous, as is the format. 

4) The tour is very Euro-centric. 

 

As to what I'd like to see in racing, it would be a variety of courses and preferably racing against clock, old style GS and SL. I'd also like to see a hybrid discipline, with rhythm, pitch and shape of the turn changes, along with few jumps and berms thrown in, BX style, but timed run, one at the time. While someone mentioned 2' limbo bar/gate for EC turns, hell yes, throw in 2 linked turns like that too! 

 

Last, but not least, it seems that I was called a hater, somewhere along the lines... That is exactly opposite from the truth - I'm a huge JJA fan. When he won his Olympic Gold, Scooby and I cracked a bottle of fine Scotch! 
I really think he's one of the best snowboarders ever. 

[queequeg]

14 hours ago, BlueB said:

3) The courses are monotonous, as is the format.

This mainly what comes to mind when I think of PGS/PSL. Its just not as exciting as a proper GS race or Super G.

[bigwavedave]

9 minutes ago, queequeg said:

This mainly what comes to mind when I think of PGS/PSL. Its just not as exciting as a proper GS race or Super G.

I agree, miss the the old GS course where they can use all of the hill for one interesting course. But...

Racers love the parallel, head-to-head format. For them it's much more fun. If you get into the top 16,  you get more than just one or two runs through the course. The further you advance in the finals the more it becomes a test of endurance. Having someone next to you can be at once a distraction and a motivator to push yourself to go faster.

It would be nice if they would mix it up and apparently this used to get discussed often amongst racers and organizers in FIS.

[queequeg]

5 hours ago, bigwavedave said:

Racers love the parallel, head-to-head format. For them it's much more fun. If you get into the top 16,  you get more than just one or two runs through the course. The further you advance in the finals the more it becomes a test of endurance. Having someone next to you can be at once a distraction and a motivator to push yourself to go faster.

I was unaware of this (not being particularly knowledgeable when it comes to racing) — but it does make sense; particularly the bit about distraction/motivation. I can understand that. I do think the sport would get a bit more limelight with more exciting races of course. I had always believed (correctly or incorrectly) that FIS got rid of the exciting races because they garnered too much attention (back when snowboarding was the red-headed stepchild). Some combination of both would be nice I think. The parallel format makes more sense for slalom, given the tightness/brevity of turns. I think GS would benefit more in terms of a more creative course design. 

Edited January 30, 2018 by queequeg
spelling + grammar

[bigwavedave]

3 hours ago, queequeg said:

 I do think the sport would get a bit more limelight with more exciting races of course. I had always believed (correctly or incorrectly) that FIS got rid of the exciting races because they garnerred too much attention (back when snowboarding was the red-headed stepchild). Some combination of both would be nice I think. The parallel format makes more sense to slalom to me given the tightness/brevity of turns, I think GS would benefit more in terms of a more creative course design. 

Totally agree! SL is more suited to parallel. They even tried a triple SL course once or twice (I think to make the whole process go faster), but nobody liked it! And, it really emphasized how you can't watch 3 riders at once.

I think they moved to the parallel format when BX came on the scene, and tried to create a similar "horse race" excitement with finalists racing to the finish line. I think they hoped to make it more exciting for spectators. As carvers, I think we are more interested in watching one rider at a time and being able to focus our analysis on how each individual manages to navigate a challenging course.

Nothing like watching Nagano in 1998! I would love to see a clip of JJ Anderson's first run again, which had him in first place (and Thedo Remmelink, our current US coach in 3rd). Anyone have a link for a video of that? I have one for the 2nd run.

If you get stoned enough, curling is pretty interesting to watch.

[noschoolrider]

3 hours ago, queequeg said:

I had always believed (correctly or incorrectly) that FIS got rid of the exciting races because they garnerred too much attention (back when snowboarding was the red-headed stepchild). Some combination of both would be nice I think.

Actually, it's the opposite of what you believe.  Spectator attendance of the single course races was declining because people did not want to watch alpine snowboarders do the same races as skiers (the ski racers were faster so their races were more exciting to watch).  FIS switched alpine snowboard races to the parallel format to save alpine snowboard racing and it worked.  The parallel format attracts a lot more spectators than the single course format did.  In most parallel races, spectators can see the entire race from the finish area, the parallel events have a faster pace, the head-to-head format is more exciting, and spectators get to watch the best racers make more runs.

Edited January 30, 2018 by noschoolrider

[noschoolrider]

20 hours ago, BlueB said:

I like Jack's post a lot, it partially sums up what's wrong with racing. But I'll elaborate more: 

1) The jumpy style that we see, could mean either, or both, the courses are not set quite right, the boards are not built with the right spec to promote the carvy style, or... the athletes/coaches have evolved away from the most efficient technique;

Jumpy is not a style - what you're seeing is rebound, which sometimes is not used in the most efficient/beneficial manner.  The courses vary based on course setter choice, location (including steepness and width of the hill) and snow/weather conditions.  Look at the difference between the 2002 Olympic course and the course in Bansko that JJA just won on.

20 hours ago, BlueB said:

2) JJA does have  a carvy style that should be very fast. Now, the younger guys should have physical advantage. If they don't beat him, that means they probably ride with inferior technique;

JJA was the fastest because he used the best technique for that course and those conditions, and he obviously trained hard to get physically ready.  So, just like 'old man' Bode Miller, Jasey-Jay's win was due to his determination, training, skill and experience.

20 hours ago, BlueB said:

3) The courses are monotonous, as is the format.

The majority of the racers and spectators disagree with your opinion.  The parallel format attracts a lot more spectators than the single course format did.  In most parallel races, spectators can see the entire race from the finish area, the parallel events have a faster pace, the head-to-head format is more exciting, and spectators get to watch the best racers make more runs.  Most people don't want to watch alpine snowboarders do the same single course race format as skiers (the ski racers are a lot faster).

20 hours ago, BlueB said:

4) The tour is very Euro-centric.

FIS alpine snowboard events in Europe and Asia have a large fan base and great spectator attendance.  Other than the 2002 and 2010 Olympics, the alpine snowboard events in North America have very poor support/attendance.

20 hours ago, BlueB said:

As to what I'd like to see in racing, it would be a variety of courses and preferably racing against clock, old style GS and SL. I'd also like to see a hybrid discipline, with rhythm, pitch and shape of the turn changes, along with few jumps and berms thrown in, BX style, but timed run, one at the time. While someone mentioned 2' limbo bar/gate for EC turns, hell yes, throw in 2 linked turns like that too!

They already have an event that has most of what you want and it's not very popular - Red Bull Edge by Sigi Grabner:

 

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by noschoolrider

[noschoolrider]

On 1/29/2018 at 7:52 AM, Jack Michaud said:

Frankly I believe it is due to that he carves more and better than most others, IMO.  It is usually only a mistake or recovery move when he lets his left hand get behind him.  His style and technique is the gold standard.  Many other racers seem too sideways to me, and seem to rely too much on slide-lock turns. 

Also, experience matters.  His body knows what to do in more emergency situations without him having to think about it.

Good comments Jack.  Everything you stated are part of why Jasey-Jay won that race.

However, there is one obvious (in my opinion) technique that Jasey-Jay used to create more speed.  Watch how Jasey-Jay was using rebound to extend his body upward so he could more effectively (and aggressively) pressure the edge (pump) at the top of the turns (right as he enters the fall-line), which resulted in more speed. 

Because the course was on a moderate slope and had a bigger off-set (similar to the course he won Olympic gold on), Jasey-Jay had the right conditions to do more carving and to create additional speed by pumping.  Jasey-Jay also did a better job of keeping his board in contact with the snow (most of the time), which was the best choice (faster) for that course.  The mistake he made (shown in slow motion) was caused by over-pressuring the edge as he hit the washboard ruts, however he had enough speed and momentum (and skill/experience) to recover.  Determination, training, skill and experience are a winning combination.

Here are some educational articles that race enthusiasts might find interesting:
https://deadspin.com/ted-ligety-is-skidding-his-way-to-a-skiing-revolution-1526280295
https://www.skiracing.com/stories/shiffrin-in-soelden-from-good-skiing-to-fast-skiing
http://www.ronlemaster.com/articles/skidding-SR6_TechTalk.pdf
http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Stivot
http://www.ronlemaster.com/presentations/USSA-symposium-Copper-Mt-2015.pdf

[queequeg]

1 hour ago, noschoolrider said:

Actually, it's the opposite of what you believe.  Spectator attendance of the single course races was declining because people did not want to watch alpine snowboarders do the same races as skiers (the ski racers were faster so their races were more exciting to watch).  FIS switched alpine snowboard races to the parallel format to save alpine snowboard racing and it worked.  The parallel format attracts a lot more spectators than the single course format did.  In most parallel races, spectators can see the entire race from the finish area, the parallel events have a faster pace, the head-to-head format is more exciting, and spectators get to watch the best racers make more runs.

Thanks for your explanation—what you say makes a ton of sense. I don't know where I acquired the perspective that the FIS had neutered alpine snowboarding events to curtail excitement around them in favor of skiing. Perhaps just because snowboarding was so dogged-on by skiers in general during its early years.

Pity people don't seem to enjoy watching the unique drama of alpine snowboarders whipping around gates just inches from the ground on a single edge. I certainly would; but It does follow that for the average viewer absolute speed would be the only concern. 

Red Bull Edge — this looks more like an exposition event than any kind of actual contest. I can see why it isn't popular.

Edited January 30, 2018 by queequeg
grammar/spelling + addenda

[noschoolrider]

2 hours ago, queequeg said:

Thanks for your explanation—what you say makes a ton of sense. I don't know where I acquired the perspective that the FIS had neutered alpine snowboarding events to curtail excitement around them in favor of skiing. Perhaps just because snowboarding was so dogged-on by skiers in general during its early years.

You're welcome, and thank you for your openness and honesty.  Some negative feelings/perspectives about the FIS are understandably due to what happened to the International Snowboard Federation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Snowboard_Federation) and because of the anti-hard-boot attitude that resulted in major changes to Bordercross courses.

2 hours ago, queequeg said:

Pity people don't seem to enjoy watching the unique drama of alpine snowboarders whipping around gates just inches from the ground on a single edge. I certainly would; but It does follow that for the average viewer absolute speed would be the only concern.

Yea, I also enjoyed watching races on courses like the one in the 1998 Nagano Olympics, and I also understand why some people don't care for modern snowboard racing (I like it)...  But, it is what it is, and I think that anything (like racing) that gives alpine snowboarding more exposure is good for the sport.

2 hours ago, queequeg said:

Red Bull Edge — this looks more like an exposition event than any kind of actual contest. I can see why it isn't popular.

That event looks like fun and Sigi Grabner is a fun guy and a great businessman.  However, that type of event does not specifically showcase (or benefit) alpine snowboarding and obviously that's not Sigi's intention.  Like you said, it's more of an exposition event, and it's also good for Sigi's snowboard business.

Edited January 31, 2018 by noschoolrider

[Beckmann AG]

====

Edited January 31, 2018 by Beckmann AG
itchy trigger finger

[Beckmann AG]

On 1/29/2018 at 8:20 PM, lonbordin said:

  Interesting that he has F2 CNC up front and the regular in the back.

Yes, yes it is.

Good for you, JJA. Way to show persistence and passion.

When 'old man' Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine skiing history most experts said his win was due to his determination, training, skill and experience.  However, when Jasey-Jay wins a world cup event at 42 you say it's because "something is very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing".

Old man Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine history for a number of reasons. Among them, the fact that he is physically predisposed to ski well. Also the fact that he eschewed conventional wisdom for a better way to ski, something the establishment can't seem to accept or figure out. And also, when you've skied as long and as well as he did, you make a crap-load of mistakes, mistakes which nicely informed  his storied success.

He is an anomaly though. Most racers peak and fade earlier in life. And I think that was the point Boris was trying to make. JJA isn't anomalous like Bode, just really good at what he does. Wondering why he succeeded in what is fundamentally a 'young man's game'  is a good question. 

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Jumpy is not a style - what you're seeing is rebound, which sometimes is not used in the most efficient/beneficial manner.

Up-unweighting, however you choose to do it, is generally slow, a waste of energy/momentum, and essentially creates a time delay in the action of the ski/board on the snow, which has to be accounted for later in the turn. While it was dominant in ski racing back when equipment wasn't all that 'good', you don't see it now unless an athlete has no other choice in the moment. It's as if snowboard racing never took the opportunity to watch a World Cup ski event, and said "Hey, why are we still using largely abandoned technique, when ski racing has moved on to something faster?"

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Here are some educational articles that race enthusiasts might find interesting:
https://deadspin.com/ted-ligety-is-skidding-his-way-to-a-skiing-revolution-1526280295
https://www.skiracing.com/stories/shiffrin-in-soelden-from-good-skiing-to-fast-skiing
http://www.ronlemaster.com/articles/skidding-SR6_TechTalk.pdf
http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Stivot
http://www.ronlemaster.com/presentations/USSA-symposium-Copper-Mt-2015.pdf

With all due respect Don, if you buy into this kind of antiquated/self important information, you're doing yourself a disservice.

[noschoolrider]

On 1/30/2018 at 6:31 PM, Beckmann AG said:

On 1/28/2018 at 2:40 PM, noschoolrider said:

When 'old man' Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine skiing history most experts said his win was due to his determination, training, skill and experience.  However, when Jasey-Jay wins a world cup event at 42 you say it's because "something is very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing".

Old man Bode Miller became the oldest Olympic medalist in alpine history for a number of reasons. Among them, the fact that he is physically predisposed to ski well. Also the fact that he eschewed conventional wisdom for a better way to ski, something the establishment can't seem to accept or figure out. And also, when you've skied as long and as well as he did, you make a crap-load of mistakes, mistakes which nicely informed  his storied success.

He is an anomaly though. Most racers peak and fade earlier in life.

Is your banter detector broken?

You didn't catch that I wrote "old man Bode Miller" as a teasing response to BlueB's (Boris') comment, "The very fact that an old man is winning where he probably shouldn't"?  FYI, I'm older than Bode and Jasey-Jay, so I'm the real old man.

The purpose of including the blurb about Bode Miller was to add a short tidbit that serves as a witty reply to Boris' comment and as a setup for my attempt to get Boris' detailed opinion of what is so "very wrong with the current state of snowboard racing".  The blurb about Bode only works well in that context if it's short and sweet (that's why I used only one sentence).  I like the six sentences you wrote about Bode, however that amount of content would have been way too big/wordy to serve my purpose (banter).

On 1/30/2018 at 6:31 PM, Beckmann AG said:

Most racers peak and fade earlier in life. And I think that was the point Boris was trying to make.

Um, yea, Boris wrote, "The very fact that an old man is winning where he probably shouldn't"

On 1/30/2018 at 6:31 PM, Beckmann AG said:

Up-unweighting, however you choose to do it, is generally slow, a waste of energy/momentum, and essentially creates a time delay in the action of the ski/board on the snow, which has to be accounted for later in the turn. While it was dominant in ski racing back when equipment wasn't all that 'good', you don't see it now unless an athlete has no other choice in the moment. It's as if snowboard racing never took the opportunity to watch a World Cup ski event, and said "Hey, why are we still using largely abandoned technique, when ski racing has moved on to something faster?"

Snowboard racers have fewer options than ski racers when it comes to creating/increasing energy/speed and improving their line.  In some situations, it is beneficial for snowboard racers to use rebound energy to increase/maintain speed.  Up-unweighting is useful in situations where it results in more speed than the other choices would provide.  Example: Pumping the board to increase/maintain speed (this is only beneficial/effective at lower speeds).

I also thought I made it clear that I think using rebound to be 'Jumpy' is not using rebound in an efficient/beneficial manner.  That is why I wrote, "Jasey-Jay also did a better job of keeping his board in contact with the snow (most of the time), which was the best choice (faster) for that course."  I also believe that the more time the board spends in the air the more that speed/time are lost.  I also find it mind-boggling that so many snowboard racers continue to deliberately let their boards move far above the snow (and spend so much time in the air), instead of trying to use rebound energy to move forward (versus more upward) and/or do a better job of keeping their boards in contact with the snow.

On 1/30/2018 at 6:31 PM, Beckmann AG said:

On 1/30/2018 at 2:38 PM, noschoolrider said:

Here are some educational articles that race enthusiasts might find interesting:
https://deadspin.com/ted-ligety-is-skidding-his-way-to-a-skiing-revolution-1526280295
https://www.skiracing.com/stories/shiffrin-in-soelden-from-good-skiing-to-fast-skiing
http://www.ronlemaster.com/articles/skidding-SR6_TechTalk.pdf
http://www.effectiveskiing.com/Topic/Stivot
http://www.ronlemaster.com/presentations/USSA-symposium-Copper-Mt-2015.pdf

With all due respect Don, if you buy into this kind of antiquated/self important information, you're doing yourself a disservice.

Don't sugarcoat it, tell me how you really feel :)

The quote you used above is from my positive reply to Jack's comment in which Jack indicated he believed Jasey-Jay's win was partly because "he carves more and better than most others".  The reason I included the links to those articles is because they contain debatable alternatives to the conviction that the racer who carves the most all the time always wins.  Do you to believe that conviction is not debatable?

If you have links to subject related articles/information that you believe are less antiquated/self important then please feel free to share, because I'm always seeking more knowledge and alternatives to experiment with.

When read I your comments (in various topics/threads), I get the impression you despise modern snowboard racing and that you also don't like modern snowboard equipment?  Do I have the wrong impression?

Anyway, do you have any proof that your superior knowledge and information leads to the best results in snowboard racing (e.g. national championship wins or world cup wins)?

***************************

For entertainment purposes only :)

Which of the following best describes a self important person?
1. A person who is sharing articles (written by professionals) that they think others might find interesting.
Or
2. A person who thinks every professional in the race community is wrong except for them, and that they know more than every snowboard race equipment builder and every coach.

Edited February 1, 2018 by noschoolrider

[skategoat]

Keep in mind that if you want GS style courses, you need big mountains. Shutting down a GS appropriate run costs a resort a lot of money and the spectators are not there to help them recoup their costs. That's why places like Whistler and Telluride no longer host alpine snowboard events.

The parallel format lends itself to a much smaller hill or even a completely artificial slope like Moscow.

Smaller resorts are willing hosts because they appreciate the exposure and the modest revenue from the events. And costs are low. Even with the smaller resorts, the business model doesn't work if they lose a sponsor (Sudelfeld for example).

GS type racing ain't coming back.

[Gabe T]

On the topic of courses,  is the one in Bulgaria representative of others on the tour or the one in the upcoming Olympics?  Seemed like offset of gates allowed for a pretty carvy run.  Didn't see too much sliding like I've noticed in some past races. 

[Beckmann AG]

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Is your banter detector broken?

Had mine removed years ago to improve my power to weight ratio. Helps with the uphills, at the cost of social grace.

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Snowboard racers have fewer options than ski racers when it comes to creating/increasing energy/speed and improving their line.

And at this point in time, that problem is almost entirely self-imposed. Also, effective racing isn't so much about generating *energy/speed, it's about making the most of what you have available, and not squandering through poor choice/tactics/technique.

*The average athlete already has an enormous quantity of energy on tap, just by standing in the start gate. What they do with that energy on the way down the hill determines who wins and who loses.

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

those articles... contain debatable alternatives to the conviction that the racer who carves the most always wins.  Do you to believe that conviction is not debatable?

That conviction isn't worthy of debate. Anyone with better vision than Stevie Wonder can see that there is a wide variety of ski/snow interaction, The problem seems to be an inability to view those interactions objectively. Besides which, some can't even decide what is and is not a 'carved' turn.

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

I'm always seeking more knowledge and alternatives to experiment with.

If you're genuine in that sentiment, and not merely offering sarcasm, then I'd suggest the following as a start:

Find a used copy of Gray's, Netter's, etc. and study the articulations of the skeletal system and also the arrangement of musculature. Then review the history of on and off-road motorsport and bicycle racing from the mid 70's to present. Then look for the commonalities. If you can do that to good effect, you stand a chance of advancing yourself.

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

When read I your comments (in various topics/threads), I get the impression you despise modern snowboard racing and that you also don't like modern snowboard equipment?  Do I have the wrong impression?

I can see why it might be convenient for you to draw those conclusions.  If you've read my comments (in various topics/threads), you might notice that my interest is in facilitating athletic progress. Part of that is understanding the limitations of the athlete, and the equipment they have, or have available.

 Spend a little time working with boots, bindings, and bodies, and you may well conclude that 'modern' snowboard boots are woefully inadequate, and 'modern' snowboard bindings are a significant compromise.  

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Anyway, do you have any proof that your superior knowledge and information leads to the best results in snowboard racing (e.g. national championship wins or world cup wins)?

First, I don't have superior knowledge. That's weak, and you're better than that. Second, do you have proof that my knowledge/ information has not led to any notable results? And third, my knowledge/information isn't proprietary, top secret, or impenetrable. As suggested earlier in this post, it's rather obvious if you just take the time to look for it.

3 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

For entertainment purposes only :)

As if.

Denigrate me if you feel it advances your cause, but don't waste your time time on 'creative writing'.

 

 

 

Edited January 31, 2018 by Beckmann AG

[noschoolrider]

1 hour ago, Beckmann AG said:

5 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Snowboard racers have fewer options than ski racers when it comes to creating/increasing energy/speed and improving their line. 

And at this point in time, that problem is almost entirely self-imposed.

So, the fact that a snowboard racer can't skate in a race course, or use two edges at the same time, or move from one ski to another is self-imposed at this point in time?

1 hour ago, Beckmann AG said:

do you have proof that my knowledge/ information has not led to any notable results?

No, that's why I asked.

2 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

5 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

For entertainment purposes only :)

How passive-aggressive of you. Knock it off.

Denigrate me if you feel it advances your cause, but don't waste your time time on 'creative writing'.

You feel you were criticized unfairly?  I'll make a note of your sensitivity.  Would you feel better if all my responses start with 'With all due respect' to mitigate the effect of any disagreement or criticism?

However, if you don't like what I write and you are sensitive to criticism, then maybe you should ignore what I write.  FYI, I can't think of (or find) a single instance where I have initiated communication with you.  I have only responded to you when you have initiated communication with me. 

Also, you don't have the right or authority to tell me what I can or cannot post. 

[noschoolrider]

2 hours ago, Gabe T said:

On the topic of courses,  is the one in Bulgaria representative of others on the tour or the one in the upcoming Olympics?  Seemed like offset of gates allowed for a pretty carvy run.  Didn't see too much sliding like I've noticed in some past races. 

The courses vary based on course setter choice, location (including steepness and width of the hill) and snow/weather conditions.

[Beckmann AG]

2 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

You feel you were criticized unfairly?  I'll make a note of your sensitivity.  Would you feel better if all my responses start with 'With all due respect' to mitigate the effect of any disagreement or criticism?

However, if you don't like what I write and you are sensitive to criticism, then maybe you should ignore what I write.  FYI, I can't think of (or find) a single instance where I have initiated communication with you.  I have only responded to you when you have initiated communication with me. 

Also, you don't have the right or authority to tell me what I can or cannot post. 

I'm fine with criticism, particularly if it's constructive.

I can see how it may have been missed, but when I wrote 'with all due respect', I was being sincere. Clearly you have strong feelings about the topic at hand, but if you take the content in those articles seriously, you're constraining yourself professionally. They're poorly written, and do little to clarify how a snowsport athlete might improve their game. 

Perhaps I could have done better to make that point without seeming to insult.

And you are correct that I have no 'right or authority to tell you what (you) can or cannot post'. Which should preclude that intent. As with the 'due respect', I meant to suggest that some of what you were writing, with respect to things like 'superior knowledge', and this little gem:

8 hours ago, noschoolrider said:

Which of the following best describes a self important person?
1. A person who is sharing articles (written by professionals) that they think others might find interesting.
Or
2. A person who thinks every professional in the race community is wrong except for them, and that they know more than every snowboard race equipment builder and every coach.

Does little to affect me, but reflects poorly on you, and for what?.

You'll also note that I thought better of my word choice/message and revised the post.

 

Incidentally, writing stands on the quality of it's content, not on the CV of the author. 

 

Edited February 1, 2018 by Beckmann AG

[lowrider]

Let's ponder...... a self important person would ? Take a selfie and post it on Facebook. You guys are hard on my brain. Good Nite.

[gnarfy]

thy guy is awsome, I met him few years ago when I purchased my board, I had the chance to do a complete visit of his shop. he is a real good person, with alot of perseverance. right in time before the Olympics..

those who thinks it's luck or a problem with the sport, why don't you get there to beat him on a race course ?

[noschoolrider]

17 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

I'm fine with criticism, particularly if it's constructive.

Like your criticism of the articles?

17 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

Clearly you have strong feelings about the topic at hand

No, I do not and I find it funny that you think I do.  As I said, I was posting debatable alternatives to a common conviction.  You replied, "That conviction isn't worthy of debate". 

I don't care one way or the other because I'm not seeking your opinion on anything.  I'm not seeking your approval or agreement.  I don't care if you disagree with everything I write.  It does not matter to me.

17 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

Perhaps I could have done better to make that point without seeming to insult.

I do not feel insulted - your self-righteous attitude is comical.

17 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

if you take the content in those articles seriously, you're constraining yourself professionally. They're poorly written, and do little to clarify how a snowsport athlete might improve their game.

You have repeatedly attempted to position yourself as being superior to Chris Knight (U.S. Ski & Snowboard Team women's speed coach), Ron LeMaster (former technical advisor to the U.S. Ski Team), and Dr. Jim Taylor by making disparaging comments about their articles and their writing abilities, and you haven't provided any compelling reasons why I should listen to you.  I do not respect that method of persuasion - you keep trying to make it about the quality of their articles when it's your behavior that I don't respect.

17 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

And you are correct that I have no 'right or authority to tell you what (you) can or cannot post'. Which should preclude that intent. As with the 'due respect', I meant to suggest that some of what you were writing, with respect to things like 'superior knowledge', and this little gem:

On 1/31/2018 at 10:54 AM, noschoolrider said:

Which of the following best describes a self important person?

1. A person who is sharing articles (written by professionals) that they think others might find interesting.
Or
2. A person who thinks every professional in the race community is wrong except for them, and that they know more than every snowboard race equipment builder and every coach.

Does little to affect me, but reflects poorly on you, and for what?

I thought it was ironic and funny that you called articles written by fellow professionals 'self important' while you were acting in a self important manner.  FYI, I don't need you to tell me what to think, or what I shouldn't read, or what I shouldn't share or discuss with others.  I do my own critical thinking and I make my own decisions.

Your behavior is the definition of self important and that is why I wrote that 'little gem'.  If you can't see the irony in that, then maybe you need to work on self awareness and you might need to get a sense of humor.

Edited February 1, 2018 by noschoolrider

[lordmetroland]

20 hours ago, Beckmann AG said:

That conviction isn't worthy of debate. Anyone with better vision than Stevie Wonder can see that there is a wide variety of ski/snow interaction

What is, however, worthy of debate is how one should define Stevie Wonder's "vision"...

Edited February 1, 2018 by lordmetroland

[MountainSlope]

Please note: Talking about "old" men winning, don't forget about the "old" women who are winning too!  One example (urning 45 this year) Claudia Riegler from Austria stands on the podium quite often. They know the game, they know their equipment and they have what it takes to win! As for Olympics and the watcher statistics... let's just say, the statistics from viewership in Sochi played a big role on our decision to do our boot project. Just a quick hey and thank you to the great people who came to see us at ISPO 2018! It was a blast!