Speed: Boards vs. Skis??

On 11/26/2010 02:53 PM, lal_truckee wrote:
On 11/26/10 10:58 AM, downhill wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

boarder.


I don't doubt that.

There have been speed skiers since about 1860. There
has been a lot of development since then. I still think
you'll see the gap narrow. Will a boarder ever beat a
a skier in timed trials? I don't know, but it will be
interesting to watch them try. and you know they will
try.

As for aerodynamics and the testing of skiers in a
wind tunnel, I'm sure, if it hasn't been done yet, it
will be done with boarders.

the tear drop shape is most aerodynamic the tuck gets close to that, at
least a lot closer than any shape I have seen a boarder in.

Also the speed trial boarders (riffing from posted video) seem to be
mounting hard shell bindings nearly parallel to the board but slightly
offset to avoid being taken for a monoskier. Convergence. I think a
modified tele binding for the rear boot would allow a tuck. Equipment
evolution is obviously still very young.

yeah, part of my point.

On Nov 26, 7:54*am, snowbender
wrote:

That's what you say; nevertheless, the one I've read was another
person's saying, blah, blah, blah, same as you are. Really, they are
just people saying, I don't think either is true. But I think that as
snowboards can carve a fairly straight line (and skis have to turn to
carve), snowboards would be faster than skis.

?????????

OMG !!!!! You flatten a ski to go fast. That's the hard part about it
at least for me. Getting in a tuck means getting your face down there
close to the surface. Then you flatten your ski *between* the edges.
It's scary because they wander a bit when you have it right there. But
the increase in speed is enough to feel much like the difference from
standing to tuck.

Bob F wrote:
lal_truckee wrote:
On 11/26/10 10:58 AM, downhill wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

boarder.


I don't doubt that.

There have been speed skiers since about 1860. There
has been a lot of development since then. I still think
you'll see the gap narrow. Will a boarder ever beat a
a skier in timed trials? I don't know, but it will be
interesting to watch them try. and you know they will
try.

As for aerodynamics and the testing of skiers in a
wind tunnel, I'm sure, if it hasn't been done yet, it
will be done with boarders.

the tear drop shape is most aerodynamic the tuck gets close to that,
at least a lot closer than any shape I have seen a boarder in.

Also the speed trial boarders (riffing from posted video) seem to be
mounting hard shell bindings nearly parallel to the board but
slightly offset to avoid being taken for a monoskier. Convergence. I
think a modified tele binding for the rear boot would allow a tuck.
Equipment evolution is obviously still very young.

Snowboarders need the connection to the edge on both feet. A loose
heel won't cut it. Maybe with a wedge under the rear binding.

Personally, as a skier who snowboards, there is no way I can snowboard as fast
as I can ski. And no reason why I'd want to. At the same time, I've had plenty
of snowboarders and skiers wail past me when I'm at my limit on either.

Additionally, I can conceive of no way in which a snowboarder can get as
aerodynamic as a skier in full tuck. Then again, I'm sure a race can be designed
where a snowboarder has the advantage. We could throw a skier and a snowboarder
out of a plane and see who's faster (probably the skier?) What does it really
matter? They are both ways to fully appreciate the joy of snow and mountains.

On Nov 26, 1:44*pm, "Bob F" wrote:

Are you calling me a doofus? I'm not the ones you are complaining about. I don't
do that. I'd much rather link tight turns through the powder or the bumps..

Here's where we need some context. Your "linked tight turns" vs my
"linked tight turns" giving you all the credit I can muster must be
about 5 to1? Any "tighter" than that and you'd just be another
snowboarder cutting a wide swath of smashed, worthless snow.

snowbender wrote:

That's what you say; nevertheless, the one I've read was another
person's saying, blah, blah, blah, same as you are. Really, they are
just people saying, I don't think either is true. But I think that as
snowboards can carve a fairly straight line (and skis have to turn to
carve), snowboards would be faster than skis.


Most snowboards have a significantly shorter turning radius than just about any
ski. Thus, they naturally will tend to carve tighter turns. Carve a straight
line? I don't think so. Sure, they can go straight on an edge across a slope.
But that's not carving.

On Nov 26, 2:15*pm, VtSkier wrote:

For those of you who ski RealSnow(tm) and don't partake
of our EasternFirm(tm) Lower Ovation is about a half-mile
long at a pretty constant pitch of about 40 degrees. It is
often bumpy and/or icy. Vertigo is steeper, but its steep
sections are very much shorter, no more than a quarter
mile each with the top drop only being over 40 degrees.

A High Rustler?

On 11/26/2010 03:46 PM, Bob F wrote:
lal_truckee wrote:
On 11/26/10 10:58 AM, downhill wrote:
VtSkier wrote:

boarder.


I don't doubt that.

There have been speed skiers since about 1860. There
has been a lot of development since then. I still think
you'll see the gap narrow. Will a boarder ever beat a
a skier in timed trials? I don't know, but it will be
interesting to watch them try. and you know they will
try.

As for aerodynamics and the testing of skiers in a
wind tunnel, I'm sure, if it hasn't been done yet, it
will be done with boarders.

the tear drop shape is most aerodynamic the tuck gets close to that,
at least a lot closer than any shape I have seen a boarder in.

Also the speed trial boarders (riffing from posted video) seem to be
mounting hard shell bindings nearly parallel to the board but slightly
offset to avoid being taken for a monoskier. Convergence. I think a
modified tele binding for the rear boot would allow a tuck. Equipment
evolution is obviously still very young.

Snowboarders need the connection to the edge on both feet. A loose heel won't
cut it. Maybe with a wedge under the rear binding.

Bob,
Are you familiar with tele-boarding?
http://www.teleboardusa.com/teleboarding.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=in1c6bB4b5M

These guys are facing pretty much forward, getting a lot
of leg bend and the rear heel is coming up nicely.
Reconsider LAL's suggestion.

It seems to me that a mono-ski set up would be less
maneuverable than a tele-board set up. With both
feet together fore and aft, it becomes difficult to
weight front or rear without putting yourself off-
balance while it seems easy to weight one foot and
you are weighting the back and weight the other,
you are weighting the front.

This tele-boarding thing might be something I'd try.

VtSkier wrote:
And I do delight in going to Mad River Glen once in a
while where they DON'T allow snowboards.

When the teenage boys were all on skis, they sideslipped down
everything just like they do now on snowboards. Why blame the device
for the actions of the person. My theory is that Alta and others
banned boards JUST to get rid of teenage boys.

As more teenagers are choosing to ski rather than snowboard, I'm
seeing more skiers sideslipping down slopes they shouldn't be on.
It's not the equipment.

Observe a bit more. EVERYBODY (who skis) does a chicken
plow down when they are in over their head. However, I'd
like to point out that it takes a while (considerably
longer than 3 days) to master a chicken plow that will
safely get you off, oh say, Lower Ovation at Killington.

The dude who is halfway athletic and has the young person's
attitude of invulnerability who is on a snowboard wouldn't
have much trouble at all heel-skidding down Lower O after
3 days of some instruction and experience. The skier, even
the invulnerable young person with half a year experience
(oh, say 15 days) will have jelly for legs at the end
of the session and probably won't do it again for several more
years. The snowboarder will think he has had a great time
and will do it again at 4PM while we watch.

I see plenty of skiers in similar circumstances side slipping. Don't tell me you
never do. If you say so, you aren't looking. It certainly has been going on
since the 60's and before.

On 11/26/10 12:44 PM, Bob F wrote:

all_truckee wrote:
Beginning boarders can and do get into stuff they can't ride, sideslip
down those slopes, and ruin the snow for the skilled. Or the better
amoung them make wide sweeping turns down fresh snow fields when
spooning turns harvesting the snow, would allow dozens, maybe hundreds
of skiers and boarders to have a full ride of fresh turns. Wasteful.
Disgraceful. Talentless doofus.

_Tragedy of the Commons_

Are you calling me a doofus? I'm not the ones you are complaining about.

Clearly not. The post paragraph focuses on those trashing the fresh. You
don't do such. Come slide N Tahoe sometime. Plenty of fresh faces. We
are fortunate that much of our best faces require long traverses which
discourages boarders. It even kills them sometimes (cases of losing grip
on the ridge and sliding into rocks uncontrolled) due to rubber sole
boots and no poles on wind swept ice. Be careful when hiking on soft soles

pigo wrote:
On Nov 26, 1:44 pm, "Bob F" wrote:

Are you calling me a doofus? I'm not the ones you are complaining
about. I don't do that. I'd much rather link tight turns through the
powder or the bumps.

Here's where we need some context. Your "linked tight turns" vs my
"linked tight turns" giving you all the credit I can muster must be
about 5 to1? Any "tighter" than that and you'd just be another
snowboarder cutting a wide swath of smashed, worthless snow.

Certainly tighter than most of the skiers I am with most of the time these days.
Admittedly, they aren't the best around. Dynamic linked turns as described by
PSIA. Including through the bumps, within limits. Working on the zipperline
through the bumps. It isn't easy on a snowboard, but I'm making progress. On a
good day, I can zipperline 10-20 powder covered bumps at a time before I miss
one. My turns on open deep powder are certain bigger than through the bumps, but
not, I think anywhere nearly 5 times what you turn unless you are extremely
fast.

Of course, our powder up here in the PNW isn't nearly what you get to play in.
How do you do in the heavy stuff?