Boot Canting and Balancing

[bud heishman]

Over the years I have found that the Sagittal or fore/aft plane is more important than many realize! There are also four parameters to assess and adjust to optimize our fore/aft balance. In order, once again, we begin from the sole of the feet and work up and out. I consider the skiers' needs for 1) "ramp angle" created by the internal boot board we stand on inside the boot, 2) "forward lean" or cuff angle 3) "delta angle" the external angle created by the height differential between the binding toe AFD height and heel piece height and the boot sole length 4) is the" binding mount position" on the ski which affects where we are standing over the sweet spot of the ski. These four parameters need to work in concert with each other to optimize fore/aft balance and play a huge role in skier body position. The body in motion will find balance and compensate wherever it needs to in order to find equilibrium.

Assessing the skiers range of Dorsiflexion is the first step in fore/aft alignment. A Skier with limited range of motion needs a steeper ramp angle and more upright forward lean angle to open the ankle joint, while a skier with hyper mobility needs the opposite, a flatter ramp angle with a steeper forward lean angle. Once this internal "net forward lean" has been set it should not be changed. We then assess the delta angle which must be done with the skier standing with boots on and clipped into bindings. We are looking at the lower leg angle and in general where the knee is plumbing over the toes of boots. When the skier is standing "cuff neutral" in their boots the knees should plumb in the ball park of directly over the end of the boot toe. This is a good starting point then we go skiing and reassess dynamically and test to find optimum for that particular skier.

I have used this methodology for many years with great success! Even though a skier may be spot on and symmetrical in their Frontal plane (lateral) they may be less than optimum on the sagittal plane.

Don't ignore the Sagittal plane!!! Optimizing alignment includes all three planes and oblique plane.

 

[Tony Warren]

Has anyone ever tried to design a self-leveling boot, so to speak? This shouldn't be so difficult.

I'm an inventor. I think this would be a diabolically difficult problem to solve.

 

[Tony Warren]

Over the years I have found that the Sagittal or fore/aft plane is more important than many realize! There are also four parameters to assess and adjust to optimize our fore/aft balance. In order, once again, we begin from the sole of the feet and work up and out. I consider the skiers' needs for 1) "ramp angle" created by the internal boot board we stand on inside the boot, 2) "forward lean" or cuff angle 3) "delta angle" the external angle created by the height differential between the binding toe AFD height and heel piece height and the boot sole length 4) is the" binding mount position" on the ski which affects where we are standing over the sweet spot of the ski. These four parameters need to work in concert with each other to optimize fore/aft balance and play a huge role in skier body position. The body in motion will find balance and compensate wherever it needs to in order to find equilibrium.

Assessing the skiers range of Dorsiflexion is the first step in fore/aft alignment. A Skier with limited range of motion needs a steeper ramp angle and more upright forward lean angle to open the ankle joint, while a skier with hyper mobility needs the opposite, a flatter ramp angle with a steeper forward lean angle. Once this internal "net forward lean" has been set it should not be changed. We then assess the delta angle which must be done with the skier standing with boots on and clipped into bindings. We are looking at the lower leg angle and in general where the knee is plumbing over the toes of boots. When the skier is standing "cuff neutral" in their boots the knees should plumb in the ball park of directly over the end of the boot toe. This is a good starting point then we go skiing and reassess dynamically and test to find optimum for that particular skier.

I have used this methodology for many years with great success! Even though a skier may be spot on and symmetrical in their Frontal plane (lateral) they may be less than optimum on the sagittal plane.

Don't ignore the Sagittal plane!!! Optimizing alignment includes all three planes and oblique plane.

Why aren't there more like you and MOSH up here in Canada?

 

[bud heishman]

Has anyone ever tried to design a self-leveling boot, so to speak? This shouldn't be so difficult.

The closest boot I have seen was the Dalbello SGS which had a boot sole with a longitudinal axis. The skier would stand on a special stand with the locking bolts loosened and place an appropriate spacer between the knees to create symmetry then the bolts were tightened. I spent time assessing skiers side by side with the Dalbello system and the results were surprisingly consistent between the two methods. There were a couple problems that killed this design, first it was very very heavy, the boot was not a very good performance boot, and there were issues with the bolts coming loose during skiing!! This was a HUGE liability as you could imagine and the boot was pulled from the shelves and recalled from the customers who had purchased it.

 

[bud heishman]

I believe there are some very good guys up in the great white north! Ask around at bigger resorts like Whistler, Banff, Big White.

 

[Philpug]

Has anyone ever tried to design a self-leveling boot, so to speak? This shouldn't be so difficult.

The closest was Dalbello with this one:

Sorry for the small image. I forget the model name. It was aslo one heavy mother.

Better image:

@bud heishman posted the description while I was looking for images.

 

[Philpug]

Has anyone ever tried to design a self-leveling boot, so to speak? This shouldn't be so difficult.

Salomon was one of the first to offer cantable soles on the SX92, again I will let @bud heishman talk more about them since he worked for them back then. There have been various new versions of canted soles including Nordica and Technica offering them up until recent and Atomic is currently offering them on the new Hawx. Cantology's new design that goes between shell and the sole is as good as there is right now.

 

[bud heishman]

Yes the Salomon boots purchased cantabile sole design patent from Daleboot and produced the SX92 in the eighties. It came with replaceable toe and heel pieces which were pre canted. The boot came with 2* and 3* soles on them and a 1* and 4* in the box. By switching the soles from left boot to right boot you could toggle between 2 or 3 degree cant angle and 1 and 4 degree angle with the other set in the box. I remember giving many in shop sales clinics on the virtues of the ability to cant the boot and how to assess the skiers, but in the end very very few shops ever messed with it or even explain it to the end users. It did work though!


Consequently, it was this era that as the Salomon rep I had to contradict all the other manufacturer's reps who came into the shops to give sales clinics on their boot features. While I was explaining that true canting needed to happen underneath the foot all the other reps were telling the sales floor kids that their boots had canting too! "See this little screw on the side of the cuff hinge? This is how we approach canting." So now all the poor inexperienced sales kids are confused and don't know who to believe.

 

[Tony Warren]

I believe there are some very good guys up in the great white north! Ask around at bigger resorts like Whistler, Banff, Big White.

You would be surprised how few of these guys will actually take the time. One pretty good guy in Banff, but no one in Big White or the entire Okanagan valley. Even the best are difficult to deal with. They seem to want to tell us how great they are at boot fitting but almost never follow through. They seem to believe that if they get your foot all comfy inside the boot, their job is done.

I will put up with quite a bit of pain in exchange for performance. But really don't see why I should have to. I would certainly pay to have someone do the work for me, but that model has been tried in Banff and the woman doing it couldn't make a living at it.

 

[Tony Warren]

Yes the Salomon boots purchased cantabile sole design patent from Daleboot and produced the SX92 in the eighties. It came with replaceable toe and heel pieces which were pre canted. The boot came with 2* and 3* soles on them and a 1* and 4* in the box. By switching the soles from left boot to right boot you could toggle between 2 or 3 degree cant angle and 1 and 4 degree angle with the other set in the box. I remember giving many in shop sales clinics on the virtues of the ability to cant the boot and how to assess the skiers, but in the end very very few shops ever messed with it or even explain it to the end users. It did work though!

I was told the Ingemar Stenmark told the factory that the screws were too loose and he couldn't feel his edges well. So they killed the whole idea. I thought it was a great breakthrough but could not find a shop that would do the actual work of getting me sorted out. Had I been a bit wiser I would have bought the boots and worked on them myself. Of course the other problems with the boot were difficult to surmount. I hated the lack of a way to find a neutral stance in the boot.

 

[bud heishman]

Actually the boot was scrapped, after world cup success with Marc Girardelli, and World speed records set by my buddy Franz Weber, because the engineers felt they had reach the design limitations, this after four evolutions from the SX90, SX91, SX92, SX93. Then we introduced the "Integral" boot. I actually skied in every evolution of the boots from the very first year through the Integral model before I ever skied an overlap boot. It had it's pros and cons for sure but was easily the best skiing rear entry boot on the market.

 

[Tony Warren]

Actually the boot was scrapped, after world cup success with Marc Girardelli, and World speed records set by my buddy Franz Weber, because the engineers felt they had reach the design limitations, this after four evolutions from the SX90, SX91, SX92, SX93. Then we introduced the "Integral" boot. I actually skied in every evolution of the boots from the very first year through the Integral model before I ever skied an overlap boot. It had it's pros and cons for sure but was easily the best skiing rear entry boot on the market.

The SX series is still the boot of choice for the speed skiing crowd isn't it? Speed skiing is really fun, and the course is pretty easy to remember!

I skied two pairs of the Integral boot. I thought they were really good boots, but I found the hinge point a bit too far back for my foot.

 

[Eric Ward]

Yep there have been lots of mechanical change options available with many boots over the years. Some in the form of adjustable cuff, sole angles, and even heel height adjustments. I would put all but the last, into the external boot change category. Always trying to reinvent the same wheels. Only one boot that I am aware of has ever tried to make a mechanical boot board that adjusted laterally. That would actually change the position of the foot inside the boot. This is the other half of the puzzle. Caber made an adjustable boot board that I believe was given to Stenmark to try. I think he made 1 extremely cautious run, and it was horrible, he took them off, and the conversation died right there. The boot board floated and moved inside the shell. It was not fixed and did not proved any ground force reaction, which is basic. So any way, now in 2016 there is still only a very small amount of people pushing the conversation back towards getting foot position correct inside the shell. Not just getting the shell right on the leg. This is literally, the other half of the conversation, and we are just not having it. At least not where it counts.

Accurate foot positioning is my battle cry. Only 10% of humans have feet that can ski a boot out of the box. 75% of ski pros and racers, are made up out of that 10% group. We know how much pronation is optimal, and we measure it and we can get the rest of the world into the same sweet spot easily. But the conversation continues to be hijacked and pushed somehow towards the known, status quo conversation. boot sole planing, cantology, and the list goes on. Straying into the unknown and learning about what you don't already know is what makes you smarter. Not just repeating what you think you know. "When you speak, you can only repeat what you already know, Only when yo listen, do you have an opportunity to actually learn something new". (The Dali Lama) The good news is foot positioning does not change in any way what we have been doing all these years. It does not replace anything, nor does planing or canting replace foot positioning, It only makes it that much better. This conversation has some how morphed into a this or that solution. Meaning do you fix the problem inside or outside? well I suggest that the answer is not black or white, its grey. Getting both right is the optimal solution.

 

[Tony Warren]

We are on the same page. How can I get you to set up my foot position inside the boot for me? I suspect that this will change my cantology stuff too.

Cheers,

Tony

 

[Philpug]

Salomon used to offer cantable boot boards in the past, I recall the SX92 had them. I will often use a varus wedge. What hapens a lot with fitter, if a little is good, more is better and that is rarely correct. If a littile is good, then it is enough, you should stop there.

 

[bud heishman]

Yep there have been lots of mechanical change options available with many boots over the years. Some in the form of adjustable cuff, sole angles, and even heel height adjustments. I would put all but the last, into the external boot change category. Always trying to reinvent the same wheels. Only one boot that I am aware of has ever tried to make a mechanical boot board that adjusted laterally. That would actually change the position of the foot inside the boot. This is the other half of the puzzle. Caber made an adjustable boot board that I believe was given to Stenmark to try. I think he made 1 extremely cautious run, and it was horrible, he took them off, and the conversation died right there. The boot board floated and moved inside the shell. It was not fixed and did not proved any ground force reaction, which is basic. So any way, now in 2016 there is still only a very small amount of people pushing the conversation back towards getting foot position correct inside the shell. Not just getting the shell right on the leg. This is literally, the other half of the conversation, and we are just not having it. At least not where it counts.

Accurate foot positioning is my battle cry. Only 10% of humans have feet that can ski a boot out of the box. 75% of ski pros and racers, are made up out of that 10% group. We know how much pronation is optimal, and we measure it and we can get the rest of the world into the same sweet spot easily. But the conversation continues to be hijacked and pushed somehow towards the known, status quo conversation. boot sole planing, cantology, and the list goes on. Straying into the unknown and learning about what you don't already know is what makes you smarter. Not just repeating what you think you know. "When you speak, you can only repeat what you already know, Only when yo listen, do you have an opportunity to actually learn something new". (The Dali Lama) The good news is foot positioning does not change in any way what we have been doing all these years. It does not replace anything, nor does planing or canting replace foot positioning, It only makes it that much better. This conversation has some how morphed into a this or that solution. Meaning do you fix the problem inside or outside? well I suggest that the answer is not black or white, its grey. Getting both right is the optimal solution.

I believe you are over generalizing when you state "But the conversation continues to be hijacked and pushed somehow towards the known, status quo conversation. boot sole planing, cantology, and the list goes on." Good boot fitters across the board recognize the importance of a well made footbed which addresses the many issues occurring with feet. Most of these issues can not be affectively corrected with a canted slab of rubber!

Eric, it's good to see we agree there are multiple elements which contribute to a well balanced and aligned skier set up. Your SBS Shim Balance System addresses one area of one parameter, the footbed or what affects the interface between the skier's foot sole and the boot board on the frontal plane. Since the SBS shims are a full length canted wedge of plastic or rubber in 1/2 degree increments, they are a very simplistic method of making a pronated foot canted. They do not seem to correct the pronation rather tilt a pronated foot to better align the line of force? I find it a rare occasion when canting the forefoot and the rear foot together is necessary, let alone at coincidentally the same angle? The only other issue I have found challenging, on the rare occasion I use your system, is getting the shear volume of a 3 or 4 degree wedge inside a performance fit boot! It just doesn't work, but then how many people with feet that screwed up, ski to the level they are in a racer fit low volume boot? A well made footbed can do everything and more than a simple full length wedge of rubber. Also I find using a full length piece of cork and sanding to the desired angle more workable and far less expensive in the event a full length wedge is needed.

It is nice to see that you address outside the boot canting as well but I question the sequence with which you approach it? I am a bit surprised you do very little in addressing the sagittal plane adjustments as they are a key element to good skier balance.

I am interested in learning your thoughts on this subject and having an open honest discussion where perhaps we can both learn from listening! Let's have that conversation you suggest needs to occur here for all to learn.

 

[bud heishman]

Salomon used to offer cantable boot boards in the past, I recall the SX92 had them. I will often use a varus wedge. What hapens a lot with fitter, if a little is good, more is better and that is rarely correct. If a littile is good, then it is enough, you should stop there.

That's very true Phil and again very few shops used this feature effectively and the ones that understood the need accomplished the desired result with a well made footbed. But it was another bell and whistle we could promote to the public!

 

[Tony Warren]

I think my boots are great. I will leave them as they are unless I get some weird growth on my foot that needs punching!

What a great array of experts on this site.

 

[Uncle-A]

Last season I purchased new boots for the first time in years. When I pulled the liner the first time I was surprised that the flat plastic insert that used to be in side the shell between the base and the liner was missing. I know that manufactures are reducing cost any way they can so I guess that was one of the things that went by the was side. I mention this only because some manufactures made these inserts that was a wedge about the size of a number one cant as well as the flat insert. If I look in my junk box I may find an example of one of theses inserts. I just never knew if they made a difference when skiing, but the boot manufactures said they worked. Have any of our members had any experience with inside the boots cents?

 

[Philpug]

Last season I purchased new boots for the first time in years. When I pulled the liner the first time I was surprised that the flat plastic insert that used to be in side the shell between the base and the liner was missing. I know that manufactures are reducing cost any way they can so I guess that was one of the things that went by the was side. I mention this only because some manufactures made these inserts that was a wedge about the size of a number one cant as well as the flat insert. If I look in my junk box I may find an example of one of theses inserts. I just never knew if they made a difference when skiing, but the boot manufactures said they worked. Have any of our members had any experience with inside the boots cents?

That could have happened at the shop, What boot is it?