|
Join Date: Aug 2002
11-04-2007, 9:46 PM
|
Reply
|
Do stiffer bindings help overcome bad form? Such as faling back on heelside landings. Will the stiffer bindings help you dig your heels and pull out the landing? It was a discussion I had while riding over the weekend and decided I wanted the opinion of the people on wakeworld......Thanks
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
11-04-2007, 10:23 PM
|
Reply
|
NO. Proper technique fixes bad form.
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
11-05-2007, 5:32 AM
|
Reply
|
Could someone list the pros and cons of both... please?
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
11-05-2007, 8:00 AM
|
Reply
|
here are the pros/cons Stiff: Might help your ankles, but might kill your knees Flex: Might kill your ankles, but you can tweak stuff easier.
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
11-05-2007, 9:21 AM
|
Reply
|
No. Proper attitude fixes being a dick.
|
Join Date: Nov 2001
11-05-2007, 9:40 AM
|
Reply
|
Here's my personal comparison: Stiff: pro= better edge response(quicker toe to heel), more control, tighter "locked in" fit, more support. con= catch edges quicker/faster. wont always come out on hard falls. Hard falls tend to hurt more. (imo). Soft: pro= looser, more relaxed feeling. Come out on hard falls. more flexible. con= not as supportive. less responsive edge to edge.
|
Join Date: Sep 2002
11-05-2007, 10:07 AM
|
Reply
|
I usually ride softer bindings and have been trying stiffer ones lately. The do at first appear to be more responsive but definitly have made my trip flips worse. Skiing made me board, Lyle Chrome Dome
|
Join Date: Nov 2002
11-05-2007, 12:11 PM
|
Reply
|
Chad, you okay there boss? I think binding selection is mostly preference & accommodating any injuries you might have. If you have bum ankles then wrap them up and support them as much as possible. If you like the feeling of extra support then by all means have at. I like a boot that holds me down but has some flexibility, just a preference. If you are falling out of HS landings bindings are not going to save you, you need to figure out why you are way out of position. Good luck, go with what feels right for you.
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
11-05-2007, 1:41 PM
|
Reply
|
I remember reading an interview with Chad Sharpe where he talked about his preference for really supportive, stiff bindings. His take was that the stiffer bindings have probably prevented him from having knee injuries. I'm pretty sure he's one of the few pros who hasn't blown a knee yet.
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
11-05-2007, 8:20 PM
|
Reply
|
That was my thoughts as well Big.And I was going to go with Fuse's but ended up with Duece's. But I rode a board with Watsons and rode really well for my standerds and started this whole debate.
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
11-09-2007, 7:52 PM
|
Reply
|
nice profile pic Jeff, where did you pull that one out of?
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
11-09-2007, 8:31 PM
|
Reply
|
It is definitely a preference, but I would recommend stiffer bindings for the ankle support. All of my friends who ride more flexible bindings usually have at least one ankle injury every summer that sidelines them for a while. That is just my personal experience though.
|
Join Date: Aug 2001
11-09-2007, 11:38 PM
|
Reply
|
Adding to the debate. I had a pretty bad fall in a pair of Watsons where my feet didn't come out and it's been two months and my ankle still hasn't recovered. I think that if I were in looser bindings, my foot would have come out and prevented the injury.
|
11-10-2007, 7:11 AM
|
Reply
|
Andrea, hit it on the head. I also read that interview with Sharpe. That was the first time I had heard that. Which completely contradicts what Garrett said earlier.
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
11-10-2007, 9:32 AM
|
Reply
|
Chad that was one I uploaded. That was the last step I ever took before my new tattoo. And to add to the debate, If I "duck" my bindings out as oppossed to straighter that would make a difference as well right?
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
11-10-2007, 9:39 AM
|
Reply
|
I read that artcle too. I'm riding the 3DS bindings, they have nice side to side mobility, but are really supportive. Go figure...Chad made those haha
|
Join Date: May 2007
11-10-2007, 9:40 AM
|
Reply
|
Jeff- I always thought binding placement was personal pref.. But maybe I'm wrong. I ride @ 22" and 2-4deg. ducked.
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
11-10-2007, 9:44 AM
|
Reply
|
yeah, placement has alot more to do with your own preference. Nobody has the same set of knees. I figured out how far to duck mine by jumping, landing and going all the way down. That way i can see how my knees naturally wanted to bend. Made a difference! My knees never are sore after a session.
|
11-10-2007, 9:53 AM
|
Reply
|
I think you are more susceptible to knee injuries the further you "duck" out the bindings.
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
11-10-2007, 9:55 AM
|
Reply
|
Again, all depends on your knees. If you go INSANE duck or heaven forbid..PIDGEON TOED, i'd think your a pretty good candidate for some knee hurtin'
|
Join Date: Aug 2002
11-10-2007, 10:12 AM
|
Reply
|
Yeah I usually ride all the way out on my 140 Marius but I'm 6'2 so easily done. But the board that started the discussion was an 08 Marius with a bad insert so I have to ride 1 hole in. So new board 1 hole in with Watson bindings set straighter then I was used to equalled a really good set on my part. But I think it's mostly in my head and bad form. And that is the easy answer I suppose.
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
11-10-2007, 5:38 PM
|
Reply
|
I was always a snowboard boot stiff kind of guy, but I decided to give a little more moderate binding a try and I bought the Ronix Ones. Now first run out they were sweet, poke like mad until halfway thru the summer, I blew my ankle to bits. Don't get me wrong the Ones were awesome no complaints, but Im going to go back to a stiffer binding because riding as much as possible is goal #1....
|
Join Date: May 2007
11-10-2007, 7:57 PM
|
Reply
|
Thats crazy Kellan same thing happened to me this last summer. Bought a pair of ones, had them heat molded to my foot, got on the water, 2nd set just about blew my ankle to pieces. Switched to CT. Watsons, liked them but could not get used to CT. Currently ridin' Obrien Xenons, love em'.
|
|