A wide stance

[mattchuck2]

Totally condition dependant . . . having a really wide stance in bumps is just as ridiculous as having your feet glued together in a NASTAR course. Having your knees touching on ice is just as dumb as adopting the Larry Craig in powder (unless you ski powder like Nobis, in which case I will be stopping by your house later to worship you).

Totally depends. . .

 

[fixedgrip16]

Together. Tight. My boots are scratched up on the sides, and my tips are shaven down about 1/8". Tight, tight, tight. That's how I like it.

Mine are just like that too. Open 'em up a bit for gs type turns though.

 

[jaywbigred]

Wider at speed/on groomed terrain.

Much closer in the bumps. In fact, I can't keep my all-mountain skis as close as I'd like/need to, in the bumps. Part of the reason I bought mogul skis last year.

 

[riverc0il]

Stance should never be a constant. You gotta mix it up depending upon the conditions. If you have just one "stance" then you are likely using the wrong tool for the job in many situations.

 

[RISkier]

Wide for cruising the groomers..narrower for the bumps...I do notice alot of older skiers skiing with a narrow stance on supershapes..which doesn't make sense..a wider stance means more angulation..I feel like in crud and powder...wider is better to plow through the gnar..

My stance is pretty wide in this picture..but I unfortunately crashed into the camaraman..Ski9..

If you look at any of Harold Harb's stuff he would say that a wide stance would reduce angulation. He also talks about vertical separation as compared to what most of us think of as a wide stance. If you're really angulated your skis can be quite far apart vertically even with very little horizontal separation. He's a lightening rod and seems to have strong political disagreement with PSIA. I'm not a Harb head and my ski guru is PSIA, but I do think that a wide stance (horizontal width) reduces your ability to angulate.

 

[Hawkshot99]

When skiing the short quick turns the boots are touching. Spread it out at speed. I just feel more comfortable with my legs tighter.

 

[rueler]

If you look at any of Harold Harb's stuff he would say that a wide stance would reduce angulation. He also talks about vertical separation as compared to what most of us think of as a wide stance. If you're really angulated your skis can be quite far apart vertically even with very little horizontal separation. He's a lightening rod and seems to have strong political disagreement with PSIA. I'm not a Harb head and my ski guru is PSIA, but I do think that a wide stance (horizontal width) reduces your ability to angulate.

I'm of the school of thought that you need to be terrain/condition flexible when talking about the stance you're going to use...as many have said already.

I do however feel that a "wider" stance (hip width) will allow you to create more angles than a narrower stance. By having both legs somewhat apart and independent from each other you are able to take advantage of your greatest angle making joint...the hip!! It is a ball and socket joint and provides you with the ability to create much greater angles than if you have them locked together and working as one. just my .02

 

[fixedgrip16]

Here's a pic of yours truly some years ago on the backside of Sugarloaf . . . fairly narrow stance. But oh baby the POW. Days like that daze you with lasting memories.

 

[rueler]

pow is definitely a time where it benefits to narrow the stance from your norm!

 

[riverc0il]

pow is definitely a time where it benefits to narrow the stance from your norm!

When the snow is right and the boards are fat and the trail is open, wide stance in powder can be pretty cool too. All depends upon the conditions... even with pow.

 

[Geoff]

I'm always fighting my early 1970's heritage. My stance is very closed unless I'm really concentrating on it.

 

[eastcoastpowderhound]

When the snow is right and the boards are fat and the trail is open, wide stance in powder can be pretty cool too. All depends upon the conditions... even with pow.

yup...when you've got two tips out in front of you with a width of around 140mm each...around a foot width of combined surface area out there, you're going to have to open 'em up a bit. I can't think of any top big mountain skiers who lock their knees together in the deep stuff.

 

[rueler]

When the snow is right and the boards are fat and the trail is open, wide stance in powder can be pretty cool too. All depends upon the conditions... even with pow.

absolutely!! There are so many factors that come into play! You mentioned another one...what kind of sticks are you sliding on??

 

[fixedgrip16]

Didn't even take ski width into consideration. True enough though with a wide ski you wouldn't have a narrow stance. Would seem awkward if not impossible given the surface area of the skis. Mine are Rossi B2's though so generally a somewhat narrow stance-- hip width or less (knees definately not locked together) is preferred to create a wider platform for leverage.

 

[rsf0000001]

If you look at any of Harold Harb's stuff he would say that a wide stance would reduce angulation. He also talks about vertical separation as compared to what most of us think of as a wide stance. If you're really angulated your skis can be quite far apart vertically even with very little horizontal separation. He's a lightening rod and seems to have strong political disagreement with PSIA. I'm not a Harb head and my ski guru is PSIA, but I do think that a wide stance (horizontal width) reduces your ability to angulate.

This brings up an important point. I think many of you don't realize how close your legs are together when making high speed turns. The more you lean into a turn, the tighter your stance gets even though your skis are contacting the snow several inches apart. If you didn't bring your legs together during a high speed turn then you would be sitting on your uphill ski while your downhill leg was fully extended. In fact if your legs are wider than your hips during a carve then you are relying too much on your down hill ski and not using your uphill ski properly.

I personally couldn't care how tight my stance is. All that matters is that I'm having a good time and I'm not getting hurt.

 

[mattchuck2]

This brings up an important point. I think many of you don't realize how close your legs are together when making high speed turns. The more you lean into a turn, the tighter your stance gets even though your skis are contacting the snow several inches apart. If you didn't bring your legs together during a high speed turn then you would be sitting on your uphill ski while your downhill leg was fully extended. In fact if your legs are wider than your hips during a carve then you are relying too much on your down hill ski and not using your uphill ski properly.

I personally couldn't care how tight my stance is. All that matters is that I'm having a good time and I'm not getting hurt.

Well, a lot of instructors would say that this is what you want . . . one "short" leg, and one "long" leg. Like this:

As long as you're balanced, it looks fine to me . . .

 

[WoodCore]

I'm of the school of thought that you need to be terrain/condition flexible when talking about the stance you're going to use...as many have said already.

I do however feel that a "wider" stance (hip width) will allow you to create more angles than a narrower stance. By having both legs somewhat apart and independent from each other you are able to take advantage of your greatest angle making joint...the hip!! It is a ball and socket joint and provides you with the ability to create much greater angles than if you have them locked together and working as one. just my .02

Nicely said rueler! In addition to being able to achieve better angles a wider stance also provides increased stability and allows for more dynamic skiing because your legs are able to operate independent from one another (short leg/long leg).

A quick way too demonstrate the increase in stability with a wider stance: have your ski partner stand on flat ground with feet together and push them sideways having them try to resist falling over (most likely they will) then repeat with a shoulder/hip width stance and compare the difference. It's all about starting with the correct platform and being able to adjust to varying conditions and terrain.

 

[skimore]

pow is definitely a time where it benefits to narrow the stance from your norm!

How so....powder skiing is about balance which a narrow stance will not help

 

[rueler]

If you've ever seen me ski, you would know that I'm never in a narrow stance to begin with....but, in certain pow situations my stance is about a quarter to a half inch narrower than on a groomed slope.

 

[Greg]

How so....powder skiing is about balance which a narrow stance will not help

Disagreed. I like to look at a narrow stance in powder as building a single stable platform on which to ski, especially in dense powder or cruddy snow. You can get away with a wider stance if the consistency of the powder is light.