Duck feet

[Henry]

Green, when you stand so you flex your legs and your knees move parallel, then your feet are duck footed? And when you stand with your feet straight forward and flex your legs your knees come together? Like mine. Posted footbeds fixed that for me. Posted footbeds have built-in wedges under the feet to raise either the insides or the outsides of the feet. I need about 2° (L) and 3° (R) to get aligned. Mine are thick under the insides of the feet to tilt the feet outward.

You say that you have custom made insoles. I question whether they were correctly made for you. Lots of so-called boot fitters look on the insoles as easy profit items. I'm sure someone here can suggest a really good boot shop in an area you can reach that can correctly align footbeds, boot cuff alignment, and boot sole canting as needed.

A few people have duck feet to the extreme. Snowboards were invented for them.

 

[green26]

Green, when you stand so you flex your legs and your knees move parallel, then your feet are duck footed? And when you stand with your feet straight forward and flex your legs your knees come together? Like mine. Posted footbeds fixed that for me. Posted footbeds have built-in wedges under the feet to raise either the insides or the outsides of the feet. I need about 2° (L) and 3° (R) to get aligned. Mine are thick under the insides of the feet to tilt the feet outward.

You say that you have custom made insoles. I question whether they were correctly made for you. Lots of so-called boot fitters look on the insoles as easy profit items. I'm sure someone here can suggest a really good boot shop in an area you can reach that can correctly align footbeds, boot cuff alignment, and boot sole canting as needed.

A few people have duck feet to the extreme. Snowboards were invented for them.
View attachment 109922

Hey Henry - thanks - it's as you say. I'm pretty slow on the uptake and it's taken a long time for me to realize that this particular thing was affecting my skiing. Custom footbeds - yeah, had a good fitter, Cordy at Footloose, but I think perhaps I was not giving good feedback, because I was only concentrating on how my foot felt, not how it affects everything up from the feet like dominos tumbling upward.

 

[Rod9301]

It's very rare that a boot fitter cab make a proper, correcting orthotic.
For this you should go to a podiatrist.

 

[otto]

It's very rare that a boot fitter cab make a proper, correcting orthotic.
For this you should go to a podiatrist.

There is a fair amount of myth and innuendo going around this thread about duck footed stance. First of all the percentage of this stance is on the lower side of the population. Secondly if it was this incredible solution there would still be a market for some manufacturer to sell abducted stance boots into the marketplace. So ask the question why are Nordica Agressors and Fischer Somatec boots no longer on the market? They built them, brought them to market and then abandoned the concept. Third point there are boots that are slightly abducted off the sole or rail on the market and not promoted as such. Not all boots have the foot perfectly parallel to the rail. The last point to make is that the abducted stance boot is only necessary for the human that does not have the flexibility in their joint spacing or any other "fix" that can accommodate the torque like an adjustable cuff, cuff rivets that allow the cuff travel either outboard or inboard off the lower, and the potential to build a footbed that can help to relax the angles in the STJ and forefoot that are putting torque on the lower leg and ankle joint.

This may come across as controversial, however I have been fitting ski boots my entire adult life ( 45 years ) and I have never seen a device from a podiatrist that was made out of compatible materials, properly built, trimmed, or integrated into the ski boot. A podiatrist goes to medical school to learn how to "fix the foot" for walking around on this planet. They focus on surgery versus preventative measures. I am not sure where you might go to find a foot surgeon that had a clue about how the foot functions in a fixed foot device like a ski boot. A boot fitter is only trained with the fixed foot devices specifically intended to be built out of materials, and shaped and trimmed to accommodate the foot on a hard soled fixed foot device intended to drive the ski into turns, edging, and comfort inside of a boot that will also to some degree control rotational forces with the boot shell.

Cut to the chase... The need for a proper, correcting device inside of a ski boot is a rainbow unicorn problem that does not need to be solved with a device that is expected to do the lions share of the correction from the bottom up in gate motions. If you have gait motion problems inside of your ski boot, there are other issues that need to be solved, way before a footbed is built.

The footbed in a ski boot is there to comfortably support the arch and neutrally control the rear foot from rolling side to side. Done perfectly it will improve the connection between your feet and the snow. The direct mold style of custom footbeds that are available from any legitimate ski shop out there are perfectly suited for the skier that is in the boot and for the boot that is cradling the skiers foot. As long as it is well made, properly trimmed and integrated, matches the sustainable arch structure and gently cradles the heel bone to help keep the heel cord neutrally oriented while driving the ski. Based on that criteria why would you be sitting in a podiatrists office waiting to get anything other than cut on? JFWIW there are foot mechanics on humans that are best dealt with in ski boots from only the most knowledgeable boot fitters. That usually means, but absolutely not limited to seeing a boot fitter that is also a pedorthist. A pedorthist is a certified manufacturer of custom built orthotics and footbeds. Normally in a podiatric practice the podiatrist may have a pedorthist on hand to cast you for an orthotic and potentially to build the device. Most podiatry practices have either the pedorthist on staff to do the casting or an assistant that can cast you for a device. After the cast is made most podiatrists send the cast off to a lab that employs pedorthists to build the device. Regardless there is a strong possibility that neither the podiatrist, or pedorthist building the device will ever see the inside of your ski boot. In most cases when a customer shows up with an orthotic from the podiatrist or the pedorthist, that they would like installed in the boot they are buying or fitting from me, I will assess the device in terms of what is made out of and its potential for integration into the correct size and shape boot, as well as it's match to the arch shape. It is the exception not the rule that one of those devices ever ends up in the ski boot. Usually they end up in the trash bin. Another $500 bucks pissed away.

 

[Uncle-A]

There is a fair amount of myth and innuendo going around this thread about duck footed stance. First of all the percentage of this stance is on the lower side of the population. Secondly if it was this incredible solution there would still be a market for some manufacturer to sell abducted stance boots into the marketplace. So ask the question why are Nordica Agressors and Fischer Somatec boots no longer on the market? They built them, brought them to market and then abandoned the concept. Third point there are boots that are slightly abducted off the sole or rail on the market and not promoted as such. Not all boots have the foot perfectly parallel to the rail. The last point to make is that the abducted stance boot is only necessary for the human that does not have the flexibility in their joint spacing or any other "fix" that can accommodate the torque like an adjustable cuff, cuff rivets that allow the cuff travel either outboard or inboard off the lower, and the potential to build a footbed that can help to relax the angles in the STJ and forefoot that are putting torque on the lower leg and ankle joint.

This may come across as controversial, however I have been fitting ski boots my entire adult life ( 45 years ) and I have never seen a device from a podiatrist that was made out of compatible materials, properly built, trimmed, or integrated into the ski boot. A podiatrist goes to medical school to learn how to "fix the foot" for walking around on this planet. They focus on surgery versus preventative measures. I am not sure where you might go to find a foot surgeon that had a clue about how the foot functions in a fixed foot device like a ski boot. A boot fitter is only trained with the fixed foot devices specifically intended to be built out of materials, and shaped and trimmed to accommodate the foot on a hard soled fixed foot device intended to drive the ski into turns, edging, and comfort inside of a boot that will also to some degree control rotational forces with the boot shell.

Cut to the chase... The need for a proper, correcting device inside of a ski boot is a rainbow unicorn problem that does not need to be solved with a device that is expected to do the lions share of the correction from the bottom up in gate motions. If you have gait motion problems inside of your ski boot, there are other issues that need to be solved, way before a footbed is built.

The footbed in a ski boot is there to comfortably support the arch and neutrally control the rear foot from rolling side to side. Done perfectly it will improve the connection between your feet and the snow. The direct mold style of custom footbeds that are available from any legitimate ski shop out there are perfectly suited for the skier that is in the boot and for the boot that is cradling the skiers foot. As long as it is well made, properly trimmed and integrated, matches the sustainable arch structure and gently cradles the heel bone to help keep the heel cord neutrally oriented while driving the ski. Based on that criteria why would you be sitting in a podiatrists office waiting to get anything other than cut on? JFWIW there are foot mechanics on humans that are best dealt with in ski boots from only the most knowledgeable boot fitters. That usually means, but absolutely not limited to seeing a boot fitter that is also a pedorthist. A pedorthist is a certified manufacturer of custom built orthotics and footbeds. Normally in a podiatric practice the podiatrist may have a pedorthist on hand to cast you for an orthotic and potentially to build the device. Most podiatry practices have either the pedorthist on staff to do the casting or an assistant that can cast you for a device. After the cast is made most podiatrists send the cast off to a lab that employs pedorthists to build the device. Regardless there is a strong possibility that neither the podiatrist, or pedorthist building the device will ever see the inside of your ski boot. In most cases when a customer shows up with an orthotic from the podiatrist or the pedorthist, that they would like installed in the boot they are buying or fitting from me, I will assess the device in terms of what is made out of and its potential for integration into the correct size and shape boot, as well as it's match to the arch shape. It is the exception not the rule that one of those devices ever ends up in the ski boot. Usually they end up in the trash bin. Another $500 bucks pissed away.

So why don't you just tell the OP what shop you work in and he can make an appointment?

 

[KingGrump]

So why don't you just tell the OP what shop you work in and he can make an appointment?

But everybody already know.

 

[Uncle-A]

But everybody already know.

Not everybody.

 

[KingGrump]

Fleeting memories.

Here is a good video to jostle the memory.

 

[Uncle-A]

Fleeting memories.

It's ruff getting old, not sure if I ever saw that the first time. Thanks, it looks like a good set up. Punching boots has come a long way since I worked in a shop.

 

[Steve]

Amazing setup!

 

[NE1]

While I agree with Otto's assertion that creating a footbed for a ski boot is, and should be, an entirely different process than the custom gait orthotic obtained from a podiatrist/pedorthist, the @ $500 spent at the latter can certainly be a good investment if you need it for other purposes and they do not belong in the trash can. I believe he was referring to an instance where the orthotic was created for the sole (pardon the pun) purpose of placement in an as-yet-undetermined ski boot.

 

[Henry]

I was asking Mr. Green if his duck feet were like mine. I'm a pronater.

I consider posted footbeds to be ankle alignment, the first step in full ski boot alignment. With the posted footbeds my ankles are straight, my feet point straight ahead, and my knees flex parallel straight ahead.

 

[NE1]

With the posted footbeds my ankles are straight, my feet point straight ahead, and my knees flex parallel straight ahead.
View attachment 110402

And...the ankle pocket of the boot requires much less modification.

 

[otto]

I was asking Mr. Green if his duck feet were like mine. I'm a pronater.
View attachment 110401

I consider posted footbeds to be ankle alignment, the first step in full ski boot alignment. With the posted footbeds my ankles are straight, my feet point straight ahead, and my knees flex parallel straight ahead.
View attachment 110402

Case in point... There is a big difference between a foot that is truly "duck" footed and a foot that pronates.

A "duck" footed human has a foot that is actually turned out and it is structural. not to be corrected with a footbed, or cuff adjustment or surgery ( with the exception of grossly deformed feet and lower legs ) You could accommodate this malady with a true abducted boot like a Nordica Agressor or an older Fischer Vacuum model. You could adapt a non abducted boot with a massive 5th met and lateral column stretch with an equal stretch on inside of the calcaneous or heel bone. And some tweaking of the cuff alignment and fore/aft travel.

For the pronated foot, pronation is a tri-planer motion that can be controlled with a well built footbed, and the reduction of over active dorsiflexion. The footbed helps to control the foot in the sagittal, frontal and transverse plane. So left unsupported the foot can go through the movement that appears to have the foot in a "duck" position. Using the photo above you can see how it is possible to reduce that everted, torqued, foot into a narrower, shorter and less everted foot inside the boot without any negative impact.

 

[bud heishman]

Great info Otto!

I would add, when working with extremely duck footed customers a footbed is the first step, However; I pay particular attention to range of motion. As the OP stated, just standing with feet pointing parallel is strenuous. This tells me their ability, with or without a footbed, to rotate their foot more inward than straight ahead is extremely limited if not impossible. This lack of rotational range will have very negative affects on their ability to ski. In this instance I look to give them some congruency. What I mean by that is, ideally when the foot is facing straight ahead the skier should have the ability to twist the foot at least 15 to 20 degrees internally (adduct) as well as externally (abduct). People generally are able to abduct more than adduct but the important point is there should be some ability to twist the foot inward past straight ahead or 0 degree.

on rare occasions I have worked with skiers like this who have had either a past injury (broken leg healed/set poorly) or poor morphology, where I have mounted the binding(s) in an abducted stance. This requires a ski wide enough to accommodate this adjustment. I have photos and video of one such gentleman we did this for and he was so happy and thankful that he could ski again. The goal is to get the knee tracking relatively straight when flexing the boot.

 

[PaganSkier]

Usually, Duck footed stance comes from tibial torsion, femoral torsion, or femoral head retroversion. Retroversion is a hip joint issue. All of these are traverse( rotational in and out) plane issues.
Fischer SomaTec addresses these issues, or bindings mounted duck.

Canting generally addresses Frontal (think vertical tilt side to side) plane issues. Ie Knock kneed or bowlegged.

A different version of duck foot is a foot issue that comes from the forefoot being abducted on the heel due to a very collapsed arch. The Nordica Aggressor was built with this pronated stance. Nordica also made a wide last boot built like the Aggressor but I can't recall its name. It was labeled Neutral Foot Position IIRC.

YES - I think there is great hesitancy to recognize duck foot binding mount as a possible solution to being able to stand on a flat ski, and to address lateral knee pain. I have about 10 deg of external tibial torsion due to lower leg fracture trying to be a gymnast, so about 6 years ago I finally I rolled my own solution. Right foot 3 deg abduction AND 3 deg medial cant. Left foot 1.5 deg abduction and 2 deg medial cant. It took a lot of experimenting, and a few pairs of skis look like swiss cheese. But I can ski tour for a week straight without getting enormous swelling in my knees from forcing my knees to rotate inward while in the skin track. I can ride a surface lift without killing my knees. I can rail groomers all day, or ski bumps (part of the day).

 

[KJL]

YES - I think there is great hesitancy to recognize duck foot binding mount as a possible solution to being able to stand on a flat ski, and to address lateral knee pain. I have about 10 deg of external tibial torsion due to lower leg fracture trying to be a gymnast, so about 6 years ago I finally I rolled my own solution. Right foot 3 deg abduction AND 3 deg medial cant. Left foot 1.5 deg abduction and 2 deg medial cant. It took a lot of experimenting, and a few pairs of skis look like swiss cheese. But I can ski tour for a week straight without getting enormous swelling in my knees from forcing my knees to rotate inward while in the skin track. I can ride a surface lift without killing my knees. I can rail groomers all day, or ski bumps (part of the day).

Hopefully I don’t ruffle any feathers resurrecting this thread ….

May I ask:

1. Do your boots accommodate any of your abducted stance, I mean in addition to the 1.5-3° of abduction you put into the bindings?

2. What was the minimum width of ski you needed for that 3° of toed-out binding mount?

3. How did you recognize you needed underfoot canting in addition to the abducted binding mount?

I’m planning on mounting a toed-out binding with a spare set of Tyrolia PRD rails (from a Protector purchase) but am approaching this carefully though with every expectation of having my own “Swiss cheese” ski.

My own toe-out is 9-13° in bare feet but just 2-4° inside my (custom-fitted) boot, so at this point I’m just looking for a ski that will take that much toe-out binding.

A custom footbed with a strong medial post made zero difference to the tracking of my knees, compared to a flat carbon fiber insole — plus I need the maximum abducted adjustment for my MSR Axis snowshoes for the rails not to strike each other on each step — so I’m pretty set on trying a toed-out binding mount.

 

[PaganSkier]

Back with the old EpicSki forum, I asked about abducted stance boots (like Soma), and I recall the ask-a-boot-fitter's group general reply was that most boots have a little abduction. Maybe someone from one of the manufacturers can confirm. I did pick up some old but new in box Fischer Soma plug boots, but they didn't get me even close to what I was trying to achieve. Also, only a couple of the boot fitters (Bob Gleason being one) thought my approach made sense.

I have had a bunch of footbeds made over the years including Larry's in Boulder, Danny Abshire from Active Imprints (and also one of the original Zipfit guys out of Roaring Fork Valley decades ago), Racer's Edge in Breck, Harb Alignment, and Surefoot. I've added medial posting on some to improve power transfer and alignment. This is certainly step one, but isn't a solution to my external tibial torsion.

I've mounted Enforcer 88's with Attack 2 bindings - no problem. Narrower skis (mid-70's) with a race plate might be feasible. I plan on trying that still this spring.

I can get fairly straight alignment with just canting and cuff alignment, but the amount of cant required feels very unnatural and contorts my ankle joint. Combo of first abducting the mount, and then adding Cantco shims under binding to where I have good alignment is what works for me. Some skis I find I want more cant. I don't know exactly why, but once you start experimenting and skiing around, you become pretty sensitive to over and under canted skis. 1/2 degree is very noticeable. Same with base bevel. For that reason I have never pursued sole canting. I recall getting out on new Bonafides, and felt over canted. But I think the ski just had more power than I was used to. Backed off the cant, skied a couple more days, and then I want more cant. Probably just got used to the ski's response.

Also my bike cleat setup is canted along with longer pedal spindle to allow a little toe-out without ankle to crank interference.

 

[cantunamunch]

Don't forget that the front to back taper of the ski will be a factor.

If the ski has a large difference between width at front contact point to rear, a straight mount will act abducted from the big toe edge.

 

[KJL]

I can get fairly straight alignment with just canting and cuff alignment, but the amount of cant required feels very unnatural and contorts my ankle joint. Combo of first abducting the mount, and then adding Cantco shims under binding to where I have good alignment is what works for me. Some skis I find I want more cant. I don't know exactly why, but once you start experimenting and skiing around, you become pretty sensitive to over and under canted skis. 1/2 degree is very noticeable. Same with base bevel. For that reason I have never pursued sole canting. I recall getting out on new Bonafides, and felt over canted. But I think the ski just had more power than I was used to. Backed off the cant, skied a couple more days, and then I want more cant. Probably just got used to the ski's response.

Also my bike cleat setup is canted along with longer pedal spindle to allow a little toe-out without ankle to crank interference.

Thank you for your reply!

On bikes I also have to shift my cleats as far inwards (medial, big-toe) as possible in order to reduce ankle-to-crank hits, and even then it's always reeeally close on my left foot.

I think that pretty much settles it for me: I'll follow your advice to mount bindings abducted first then experiment with canting afterwards.

Thanks again.