It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Lol
since you have yourself a backseat ski, I can see why getting bucked is an issue. Maybe correct your own technique issues, instead of looking for external solutions
But...
the dildos will bring new meaning to 'afterbang'.
Someone from Powder mag also said I ride my tails.
It's a back-seat ski ...but only up to a certain speed, at which point I rock forward into the forward waist.
Helicopters pivot forward in forward flight.
F-14 sweep their wings back.
Joggers also lean forward.
Heartcarvers rock forward too until their cruise velocity is reached.
Rozboon already observed I am pressed right up into the front of my boot. He's right.. and that's hardly backseat.
People say you should pop off a jump, but what happens if you're already forward on takeoff? You don't need to think about "popping".... well isn't that great, exactly what beginners need to avoid landing backseat, they just need to be going fast-enough for their ski. So yeah, the Stiffy Jump has an optimum speed depending on your ski, but being a relatively flat jump the ski-types can differ greatly.
BLandzHoly fuck man I thought getting my look pivots in the ass was bad when I land backseat, I don't even want to know whats gonna happen on these things
If you want a different shape, then that could be an option. You could make it.
**This post was edited on Dec 27th 2019 at 7:49:07am
The main weakness with the jump + ski combination is that if the ski has a flat-bottom then the forward lean aspect is removed (for the sake of a stable landing, ie having the flat bottom.) But this could be countered with a raised heal binding, and that really is a separate idea to be added to any ski.
But the main thrust of this thread is about having a relatively flat-jump.
**This post was edited on Dec 27th 2019 at 7:50:14am
Alienation has always been a big part my thing, to become separated from everyone and everything.. and to then find the better you. It's not about people laughing at you, it's like going into a different frequency spectrum that you almost don't register with other people.. hence HC mountain.. a place people can ascend to.
But c'mon, urban and quads is all skiing has to offer now? People are looking real stupid trying to emulate Candide Thovex.
HC_mountainAlienation has always been a big part my thing, to become separated from everyone and everything.. and to then find the better you. It's not about people laughing at you, it's like going into a different frequency spectrum that you almost don't register with other people.. hence HC mountain.. a place people can ascend to.
But c'mon, urban and quads is all skiing has to offer now? People are looking real stupid trying to emulate Candide Thovex.
look dude if you wanna play golf with a baseball bat and tangerine, go for it.
just don't expect everyone to jump on board when you tell em how much better it is than regular golf.
Because we know better
we actually know how skiing and jumping and freeskiing work.
The dildos are a terrible idea because they make crossing/uncrossing your skis difficult/dangerous. And grabbing your ski is easier than grabbing a handle.
the jump you drew exists about 50 times on every ski area, it's a roller, look around.
You are, fundamentally, a horrid skier. Your ski ideas (while I'm sure they do go downhill) are regressive, limiting, illogical and clearly coming from a place of ignorance and a lack of skiing understanding.
Heartcarve = longest running most effort troll I've ever seen, or most deluded lower intermediate skier on planet
KneeDropYou are, fundamentally, a horrid skier. Your ski ideas (while I'm sure they do go downhill) are regressive, limiting, illogical and clearly coming from a place of ignorance and a lack of skiing understanding.
Wait, you drop your knee - so why be so critical of getting your body more forward with a topsheet slant??
I mean:
SPEAKING OF TARDAGE, YOU DETACH YOUR ENTIRE BACK HEAL FFS!!
**This post was edited on Dec 27th 2019 at 7:52:00am
Lol, and?
I fail to see the relevance. But I guess ad hominem, by definition, is irrelevant.
I will, however, respond by saying: that I am able to stay balanced and keep my weight forward without a material solution. I also don't go around telling people I'd revolutionize skiing if everyone just used MY outdated bindings, MY less efficient technique. I also have an understanding of skiing fundamentals
nothing is more horrific than seeing a novice launch off a booter and land on their back and wind up hospitalized (and it is all too common.) I'm still not totally sure why this happens as much as it does.
It happens because of flat-foot/backseat takeoffs
the jump is reminiscent of the speed drops that downhill racers take.
Cause they never get wrecked on those..
This ski adds some easy trick possibilities to the jump involving oldschool tricks like daffy, spread-eagle and backscratcher.
How?
It also offers new trick possibilities as the skier can tug around their skis in the air as they please.
You clearly don't grab, as this is already possible
People say you should pop off a jump, but what happens if you're already forward on takeoff? You don't need to think about "popping"
I don't think you get how it works
[the dildos]could also be a teaching device, amongst having other uses.
KneeDrop, I am glad you chimed in here. I didn't even think about telemarking until now, but I am glad you have brought it to my attention.
Also, I never claimed to have revolutionized skiing.
Telemarking look inefficient in terms of the total movement involved. I've always found it quite vulgar to watch. In a turn, I think the rear-ski heal should be lower down, and the front-ski heal raised - and both locked in that position. That's the Meathammer Flat's slanted footbed. Also, there must be speed limitations with the telemark style, and some injury possibilities on the knee.
Yeah, I have heard this from numerous sources and it is probably in large part because the chest remains pointing in the same direction as the feet and that the twist you get on standard skis is missing. Heartcarving has that too, but it's not from separating your feet, it's from keeping the body pivoted forward and making use of an exaggerated sidecut, *possibly in the same way you are getting extra turning force by keeping the skis separated in telemarking.*
I'd like to try telemarking but I think I could waste any telemarker in terms of speed and agility with HC'ing (and be less tired at the end of a run) even though both of us wouldn't have stressed our bodies as we would've with conventional skiing.
HC_mountainYeah, I have heard this from numerous sources and it is probably in large part because the chest remains pointing in the same direction as the feet and that the twist you get on standard skis is missing.
Your lack of understanding astounds me. Traditionally, the telemark turn has even more counter than the alpine turn
No worries there, put that on the cards. And also that walking encyclopedia Rozboon. I'll challenge him too... I'm actually happy to challenge anyone on any reasonable terrain..ie not overtly dangerous. Anyhow, HC'ing has a course for competition, so really that should be the focus. Also, the slanted footbed can be applied to snowboarding too.
HC_mountainAlso, the slanted footbed can be applied to snowboarding too.
Ignoring the fact that a high heel would have exactly the opposite effect you desire(increasing weight on heels, difficult to near impossible to weight the front of your ski[try it with climbing bars])....what use do you see it having on a snowboard?
a drawing would be nice
KneeDropwhat use do you see it having on a snowboard?
I predict more effortless, better feeling carves that blend in with equally impressive airs.
After watching a number of snowboard vids, I've noticed that the best boarders often pump their carves on piste (as though their board isn't responsive enough to obtain any given line) the Gayton Flat should negate the need to do that.
Both feet straight across board (0 degrees).
As with the skis, I am not sure how they will perform switch. They may be awkward, I am not sure. I suppose that is the sacrifice.
im not sure about the stiffy jump. we had one at my ski hill and we got at least a solid 50 paramedic trips just from it. if not more. the problem was kids were over estimating the speed. it was a disaster. my suggestion would be spray painting a big SLOW on the take-off. i know from experience it eliminates at least half the paramedic trips
gypsy_kidkids were over estimating the speed. it was a disaster.
This just shows how badly kids want big air, and very often have no idea how to get it. It reinforces my point of how often I see kids landing on their back doing only a 1/4 backflip.
What were the main injuries or fall directions?
At HC Mountain there should be a large instruction board with diagrams and do's and dont's. (for your mountain too?) A "slow" sign would be just the beginning.
But I think the stiffy jump should be where people can get there first taste of air, and there should be a camera and movement sensor that posts pics of them flying through the air.
HC_mountainThis just shows how badly kids want big air, and very often have no idea how to get it. It reinforces my point of how often I see kids landing on their back doing only a 1/4 backflip.
What were the main injuries or fall directions?
At HC Mountain there should be a large instruction board with diagrams and do's and dont's. (for your mountain too?) A "slow" sign would be just the beginning.
But I think the stiffy jump should be where people can get there first taste of air, and there should be a camera and movement sensor that posts pics of them flying through the air.
Yes I did see many quarter backflips and the other popular crash position was a landing on their skis and just buckling. Both equally bad. Id say the main problem with the jump at my hill was the too short landing. These poor children were completely gaping it and landing on hard icy flat. Also because the jump was a "small" it gave parents the idea that kids were ready for it. Not knowing the speed required and actions preformed during takeoff, while airborn and while landing resulted in all the injuries. Good luck on trying to protect these little dare devils
gypsy_kidGood luck on trying to protect these little dare devils
The runway just needs to be roped off so there's a maximum speed that can be roughly guaranteed by having a maximum runway start point at the top rope: a bit like the Ski Jump - but on a much smaller scale. There could also be a lower suggested start point for total beginners.
Even pros needs to get their take-off speed right, and it's always hardest when you're not seeing others do it.
Kids are rag-dolling on takeoff and landing... they aren't in control, they are just doing something that looks fun, easy and simple and what others are doing. It also helps to be able to see people land, in which case a step-up landing would work well.
Anyway, I was thinking the Stiffy jump be for average skiers, not toddlers, so maybe there should be two.
HC_mountainYeah, the thread is almost a train-wreck. But I have realized that the dildo-ski can be merged into the Meathammer.
The Meathammer is a ski-design I have been thinking about and discussed on this site, with a tail that is wider than the tip and a forward waist. Now I have realized it needs to have a slanted footbed created during ski construction (to provide the forward lean that the full reverse-camber would've provided in the standard Meathammer.)
Ricky420If you give me a grand I will build this for you
Thanks. Not sure your background, but I have no idea what's required to build this ski, and I don't think anyone does. Even if I were to give you a grand and you built it, I'd be worried it wouldn't perform well due to the construction (and not the design) and people would get the wrong impression.
**This post was edited on Dec 28th 2019 at 5:46:53am
HC_mountainThanks. Not sure your background, but I have no idea what's required to build this ski, and I don't think anyone does. Even if I were to give you a grand and you built it, I'd be worried it wouldn't perform well due to the construction (and not the design) and people would get the wrong impression.
The ski has a 177mm tail (98mm waist.) It's an exaggerated ski, and is going to warp especially under the g-forces put on it while skiing (my current ski did.) So I think it needs a special construction. That's part of the reason I am hoping/wanting to do a colab with Porsche or any hyper-car manufacturer (like McLaren) if I could chose anyone, although it'd be interesting to see what J-Skis or Zion Snowboards would create because the snowboard should also be built (it's also huge.)
Maybe I should talk to Ice-T's wife Coco who produce pleasure devices and ask for a $1000 dildo instead and try to ski on that.
Haha I'm going to take it your joking about talking to a "hyper-car" manufacturer but if you did it would be cool, also I'm not even sure how well the ski would preforme just do to the shape of it but it's a cool idea.
Ricky420Or how a forward was would work, I feel like the slanted footbed might make a pressure point on the "waist" of the ski and create a weak point
Yeah having a pressure point at the waist isn't such a bad idea (actually it's a great idea) if it leads to smooth turns or rather an overall even ski bend, and the waist could also be strengthened (heightened?) at that point. I really have no idea what the precise impact of a slanted footbed would be on the ski, but I know it will create a forward angulation of the body, which is what I know is needed.
The hyper-car colab is plausible idea but would only happen if the founder of one of those companies skied and took a personal liking to the idea.. Pagani?? I think the idea of having a fully synthetic ski devoid of wood could work if done well.
Yeah the design should be part of a movement, so feel free to build on your own accord.
HC_mountainI really have no idea what the precise impact of a slanted footbed would be on the ski, but I know it will create a forward angulation of the body, which is what I know is needed..
A slanted footbed will required you to lean even further forward than without, to weight the tip of your ski. it will create useless forward angulation of the knees(not the body), and cause increased weight on your heels.
draw a perpendicular line off a flat ski..that's the line your body needs to be in front of to properly engage your tip...
now draw a perpendicular line off your high heel footbed. You'll never be able to ski in front of that line(especially when you can't ski in front of the first line)
you don't even know what your own movements do what in relation to skiing.
Why must you lean forward? Why must you
'counter', and face the fall line?
i understand you answer is trying to be, 'on a meatstick, you don't have to'. but on a SKI, you have to..and you're on skis
KneeDrop - the slanted footbed is meant to be for the Meathammer Flat (Meathammer Standard minus the reverse camber) and it's not for other skis.
The Meathammer is a unique design (bottom wider than top, waist forward of midline.) For me, it's hard to predict what will happen on the Meathammer Flat (let alone the Meathammer Standard.) It's really experimental territory but I think it will work.
The idea is to "fall into and during the turn" -- with telemarking the idea is to drop (or squat?) into the turn.
Also, it'd probably be useful to take a wood wedge and put it center mount on any center-mount ski under the binding just to see what would happen.
KneeDropWhy must you 'counter', and face the fall line?
Facing the fall line while skiing is the core reason why it's so injury prone and why I don't do it.
However, it does make skiing more mentally palatable because you're head is fairly stable during the run. I've discussed this at length. To me, the body should be as straight (or rather bent but not pivoting all over the place) and untwisted as possible while skiing. Less is more, and it's why I find telemarking vulgar.
HC_mountainYeah having a pressure point at the waist isn't such a bad idea (actually it's a great idea) if it leads to smooth turns or rather an overall even ski bend, and the waist could also be strengthened (heightened?) at that point. I really have no idea what the precise impact of a slanted footbed would be on the ski, but I know it will create a forward angulation of the body, which is what I know is needed.
The hyper-car colab is plausible idea but would only happen if the founder of one of those companies skied and took a personal liking to the idea.. Pagani?? I think the idea of having a fully synthetic ski devoid of wood could work if done well.
Yeah the design should be part of a movement, so feel free to build on your own accord.
You might have to have a flat section between the slanted mounting part and then another slant to the flat part of the tip if that makes any sense, it would have to be wider then the tip but thinner then the peak of the slanted binding mount point. Don't know how it would work but could help to stop a weak point
And for a ski with out any wood, I have had ideas to make "clear" skis using some kind of plexi glass core (or similar material) and clear topsheet/base and has a somewhat clear ski
Ricky420You might have to have a flat section between the slanted mounting part and then another slant to the flat part of the tip if that makes any sense[
No risen tail either.. old school style. Actually a teacher told me that a risen tail creates a lot of trailing snow spray and is this bad for teaching.
- because the ski is completely flat (zero camber,) I am thinking it could make sense to have 1 or more flat horizontal layers of carbon fiber or kevlar running the entire length of the ski. I just don't know how to integrate that with a curved tip (CF and Kevlar can be curved but I think it is much more expensive as a mould needs to be created.)
The goal of the synthetic layer(s) is to prevent warping of the wood. It may work, however it would be expensive. I suppose it may not need to run the full length of the ski, but still could be a large part of the core.
I don't know much about using plexi glass. I know some drum kits are made of it (like John Bonham's) .. same material??
