New (different) ankle question

[L&AirC]

If I "hold my ankle straight", I stiffen that leg, reducing my capacity to flex or extend.

Kneale,
Would you agree there is a difference between holding your ankle straight and your ankle held straight? The way I read the above posts is that the boot's lateral stiffness is holding the ankle straight. Wouldn't that mean there shouldn't be any reduced capacity to flex or extend?

Ken

 

[L&AirC]

A few years back I switched from my old (very old) Rossi's to new Lange's. About a 150+ flex to a 130 flex. The back and forth flex was softer but more predictable. The side to side was considerably stiffer so much so that it was noticeable (maybe better discribed as none)

When I went to the Langes this was the first thing I noticed as well. The level of control over the Salomons was amazing.

 

[Kneale Brownson]

Kneale,
Would you agree there is a difference between holding your ankle straight and your ankle held straight? The way I read the above posts is that the boot's lateral stiffness is holding the ankle straight. Wouldn't that mean there shouldn't be any reduced capacity to flex or extend?

Ken

There IS a difference , of course, but a boot is not a cast and it's possible to have muscular activity within the boot.

If I tighten the muscles around the lower leg to "hold" it, i stiffen too much.

If I press down on the big toe side to get more edge bite, I stiffen. If I raise the little toe side to increase edging, I do not stiffen.

 

[oldschoolskier]

There IS a difference , of course, but a boot is not a cast and it's possible to have muscular activity within the boot.

If I tighten the muscles around the lower leg to "hold" it, i stiffen too much.

If I press down on the big toe side to get more edge bite, I stiffen. If I raise the little toe side to increase edging, I do not stiffen.

Well put.

 

[razie]

Rolling the ankles (i.e. inversion/eversion is important for good skiing and as mentioned before, the boots must be tight to transmit those movements, but without restricting those movements too much.

While we all focus on tipping both, some focus on the inside foot tipping more and some on the outside... The OP I think is asking specifically about the eversion, i.e. tipping the outside foot towards the inside of the foot, i.e. lifting the pinkie. That's what we do with the outside foot. And specifically, the question is using eversion to increase the angles, so that implies sort of the bottom of the arc.

I think there is some element of that, for sure, I mean I think if you strongly evert when the ski is already on edge, it probably helps increase the angles a bit - it was also my focus at some point. I know some coaches talk about that "pedalling movement" or such. In my mind it is not very effective because at the end of the turn, you are ... uhh... bracing?... against the stacked outside leg and your foot eversion works against that, by trying to lift the heel even more and push your hips further inside the turn.

At the same time, that foot is certainly everted at that point, to maintain alignment and keep it on edge, and eversion is a small range of movement (compared to inversion) so I don't know how much more you can evert it - you can probably increase not the range of movement, but the effort.

In my mind, eversion is more effective in the beginning of the turn, complementing the extension of the outside leg to maintain snow contact.

cheers

 

[Jamt]

specifically, the question is using eversion to increase the angles, so that implies sort of the bottom of the arc.

I think there is some element of that, for sure, I mean I think if you strongly evert when the ski is already on edge, it probably helps increase the angles a bit - it was also my focus at some point. I know some coaches talk about that "pedalling movement" or such. In my mind it is not very effective because at the end of the turn, you are ... uhh... bracing?... against the stacked outside leg and your foot eversion works against that, by trying to lift the heel even more and push your hips further inside the turn.

Nor sure I follow you logic. Are you implying that we want maximal angles at the bottom of the arc?

Also in you last sentence, why would eversion work against extension? IMO eversion can be combined with dorsi or plantar flexion. That is the reason IMO that if you want to combine it e.g. with dorsi you could say lift you pinky side instead of pressing down on the bit toe side or even using the words eversion or tipping.
For example if you say lift the BTE side of the foot you lower the chances of incorrect mechanics in the inside foot inversion (Because you really want both dorsi and inversion), and you may even getter a better outside bias.

 

[razie]

Nor sure I follow you logic. Are you implying that we want maximal angles at the bottom of the arc?

Also in you last sentence, why would eversion work against extension? IMO eversion can be combined with dorsi or plantar flexion. That is the reason IMO that if you want to combine it e.g. with dorsi you could say lift you pinky side instead of pressing down on the bit toe side or even using the words eversion or tipping.
For example if you say lift the BTE side of the foot you lower the chances of incorrect mechanics in the inside foot inversion (Because you really want both dorsi and inversion), and you may even getter a better outside bias.

The way the OP asked the question, to me sounded like it is describing a situation where he has some angles (i.e. well into the turn, with weight on the outside ski already) and then increases them... as opposed to creating bigger angles at the beginning of the turn (with outside ski unweighted). Maybe I didn't read it right... seems "bottom of the turn" was a poor choice of words on my part though.

If he meant the beginning of the turn, then the last sentence applies...

I was not trying to say that it would work against extension, but that it works with extension and complements it at the top of the turn...

In my mind, eversion is more effective in the beginning of the turn, complementing the extension of the outside leg to maintain snow contact.

cheers

If we look at just extension and eversion, it would work against extension for instance at the end of the turn, if you're trying to extend to release and evert the foot at the same time - they would kind'a contradict each-other, wouldn't they?

Bottom line, when you're already planted on the outside ski in the turn, more eversion is much less effective than at the beginning of the turn and also than other things you can do to increase angles.

 

[john petersen]

This to me is also about efficient alignment of body segments and managing forces. I experiment sometimes with making sure that I can wiggle my toes at any point in a turn or series of turns. just to make sure that Im not forcing anything...which means my alignment is off somewhere.

Supple but supported movement of the ankle joint is important. You should have just enough movement to feel that you are not locked into the boot and restricted, but enough to still refine and manage intent.

to the original question, it sounds like you may want to take your boots in for a check up and just be sure you have a good fit. once that is determined, you can rule that out.
(I might suggest that as long as the ankle is not rubbing inside the boot, then the fit might be okay.......and if it is, and you can increase efficiency by moving that way, and all other things being equal with technique, then that too might be okay...with that boot.)

Then play with the other part of the question.

I am going in for new stuff tomorrow morning and am very excited. I have great "teaching boots" right now...but I can almost count the seconds before movement is rewarded with action! (comfy slippers)



JP

 

[PTskier]

Are you implying that we want maximal angles at the bottom of the arc?

Yes. At the top of the turn we have gravity pulling the skier toward the inside of the turn and centrifugal force pulling them outward. At the bottom of the turn we have both forces pulling them outward. Greater angles are needed to handle the greater combined forces in the lower 1/3rd of the turn.

 

[Jamt]

Yes. At the top of the turn we have gravity pulling the skier toward the inside of the turn and centrifugal force pulling them outward. At the bottom of the turn we have both forces pulling them outward. Greater angles are needed to handle the greater combined forces in the lower 1/3rd of the turn.

Assuming things are static yes, but they are not. In e.g. SL you want, and the best skiers have, the max force close to the fall line, just when you pass the gate. The extra "force potential" you get later in the turn is used to accelerate you up and over rather than keeping static balance with higher forces. (I use the term up and over here even if it is usually a deeply flexed transition. It is still up and over compared to the deepest hip position)
In GS you have the max force later.

 

[john petersen]

Yes. At the top of the turn we have gravity pulling the skier toward the inside of the turn and centrifugal force pulling them outward. At the bottom of the turn we have both forces pulling them outward. Greater angles are needed to handle the greater combined forces in the lower 1/3rd of the turn.

Dont want to derail here, but, just for clarity: Gravity is the only force acting on you when standing, yes....but the moment movement comes into play, and we ride a shaped ski moving us in an arc, the sensation we "feel" is our famous construct called "Centrifugal Force"....not a real force, but I have been thinking that it is closer to what we might call Centrifugal Sensation. ( It is, however, a somewhat universally agreed upon term.....so I kinda hesitate to rock the boat....but still...)

the forces we are experiencing are centripetal and that is what is pushing back on us as we go through a turn (our edges are hooking up and the shape of the ski moves us in an arc...we have to manage those real forces somehow, and the only thing we have to go on is sensory input....)....it FEELS like increased gravity and "centrifugal force"....which we think are two separate things.

...I hesitate to say that this is wrong as it is so universally understood.(and made up)....but it does kinda work in a very simplified way if you allow it intellectually.....



JP

 

[Kneale Brownson]

For example if you say lift the BTE side of the foot you lower the chances of incorrect mechanics in the inside foot inversion s.

I like to refer to this movement as cupping the arch. I want my toes to continue feeling the bottom of the boot rather than the top, but I want the arch to rise.

 

[razie]

I missed @Kneale Brownson 's earlier post, #22 - I think it's important, I think actually there isn't enough attention given to the fact that a lot of relaxation and unweighting is good when "using the ankles" or "the feet"... aka the difference between "open chain movements" vs "closed chain movements".

 

[Jamt]

I missed @Kneale Brownson 's earlier post, #22 - I think it's important, I think actually there isn't enough attention given to the fact that a lot of relaxation and unweighting is good when "using the ankles" or "the feet"... aka the difference between "open chain movements" vs "closed chain movements".

Agree, as long as it not something that causes the arch to collapse during loading.