On a typical ski day, how often do you yard sale it?

[Cannonball]

You need bindings that aren't absolutely horrible. Let me guess.....you have 11 din markers....?

I figured out in about 1998 that when I was falling, 90% of time it was because my bindings released when they shouldn't of have. This was on 14 din marker "racing" bindings. Got some all metal 11-17 din salomons and it was quite the eye opener.

I ski 2 points above my level III+ setting (note the "+", which is another step up on the din table...so I'm at like a level 5 or 6 if such a thing existed). Bindings still come off, but it takes some force. If I try to ski a normal level III setting, I will pre-release once per run.

I never released out of a binding last season, or yet this year. Nor did I crash, but had a few minor falls over the course of the season.

Once you can safely assume that your bindings are not going to come off, your skiing style changes dramaticly. You can put much more force into a ski and ride it through much rougher snow at higher speeds, and trust it's consistancy.

Not sure I buy this. I've NEVER released from my snowboard bindings or my tele bindings....but doesn't mean I don't fall. In fact one of the reasons I left tele to go back to alpine was so that my bindings would release and save my knee in a fall.

If 90% of your falls were attributable to binding pre-release, you are talking about a completely different issue than the rest of the posters in this thread.

 

[Highway Star]

I am not an expert on setting bindings. I suspect that if I had had my bindings cranked up any tighter in my above described fall then I would have needed an operation instead of just a couple months rest. What I am saying is that making a blanket statement that tighter bindings are better may be dangerous. I just wanted to point out the risk.

The industry, with DIN settings, etc, etc has many people make a blanket assumption that their settings are alway safe and that they will always release without injury........which is completely false.

Most binding releated injuries come from people with a "proper" level III setting, thinking they can just fall any which way and the binding will release. When it doesn't they break something.

I make the assumption that my bindings are not going to release, and thus I ski to accomidate that. During a low speed fall I do not torque the ski or my leg excessively......I fall smoothly. If I'm crashing, I'm crashing hard and a few points of din isn't going to make much difference. I don't like to crash hard, so I don't ski over my head.

Rarely do you hear stories about pop'd anything due to cranked din's, because the people know what they are getting into.

 

[Highway Star]

Mine were set at DIN 6 (relatively small feet means a lower DIN for me)

BTW, smaller boot = higher din.

 

[Highway Star]

Not sure I buy this. I've NEVER released from my snowboard bindings or my tele bindings....but doesn't mean I don't fall. In fact one of the reasons I left tele to go back to alpine was so that my bindings would release and save my knee in a fall.

If 90% of your falls were attributable to binding pre-release, you are talking about a completely different issue than the rest of the posters in this thread.

The average, semi-athletic, semi-agressive, advanced level skier with a level III din setting falls from pre-releasing about half the time.

 

[Cannonball]

The average, semi-athletic, semi-agressive, advanced level skier with a level III din setting falls from pre-releasing about half the time.

So an average, semi-athletic, semi-agressive, advanced level tele skier falls about half as many times as an alpine skier?

 

[Highway Star]

So an average, semi-athletic, semi-agressive, advanced level tele skier falls about half as many times as an alpine skier?

If you were to say, bolt your heels down, then I would say yes.

 

[Ski the Moguls]

BTW, smaller boot = higher din.

A little googling on my part has confirmed your statement. Hey, I said I was not an expert.

 

[jrmagic]

I make the assumption that my bindings are not going to release, and thus I ski to accomidate that. During a low speed fall I do not torque the ski or my leg excessively......I fall smoothly. If I'm crashing, I'm crashing hard and a few points of din isn't going to make much difference. I don't like to crash hard, so I don't ski over my head.

I make this assumption as well. Not much you can do in a crash except not fight it. In a slow fall I try to keep my skis away from the snow. I skied last year with a DIN setting of 9 and had a few pre release incidents. I had a release check done and everything checked out fine. I was thinking of bumping them up to 10 this season though having lost some weight maybe the 9 will work ok.

 

[Ski the Moguls]

The industry, with DIN settings, etc, etc has many people make a blanket assumption that their settings are alway safe and that they will always release without injury........which is completely false.

Most binding releated injuries come from people with a "proper" level III setting, thinking they can just fall any which way and the binding will release. When it doesn't they break something.

I make the assumption that my bindings are not going to release, and thus I ski to accomidate that. During a low speed fall I do not torque the ski or my leg excessively......I fall smoothly. If I'm crashing, I'm crashing hard and a few points of din isn't going to make much difference. I don't like to crash hard, so I don't ski over my head.

Rarely do you hear stories about pop'd anything due to cranked din's, because the people know what they are getting into.

If your falls are being caused by pre-releasing bindings then they probably should be set tighter. Though I suspect your ski technique may need some tweaking. Unless you are skiing world cup races those DIN's sound very high to me.

My issue is that this is a public forum. I really do not think you should make blanket statements that contradict industry standards to such a large degree. Not everyone, as you say, knows what they are getting into. I can just see Nick on the phone with his lawyers asking about the potential liability of displaying such a post!

 

[Highway Star]

If your falls are being caused by pre-releasing bindings then they probably should be set tighter. Though I suspect your ski technique may need some tweaking. Unless you are skiing world cup races those DIN's sound very high to me.

My issue is that this is a public forum. I really do not think you should make blanket statements that contradict industry standards to such a large degree. Not everyone, as you say, knows what they are getting into. I can just see Nick on the phone with his lawyers asking about the potential liability of displaying such a post!

Most expert skiers are on a din above a level III+, and most advanced skiers are on a din above III. Only people skiing on a level III (or lower, gasp!) haven't been skiing long enough to know any better.

WC racers are typically on a din in the high teens, low twenties depending on the binding. That would be like a din chart level 9 or 10, if such a thing existed.

 

[Highway Star]

Though I suspect your ski technique may need some tweaking.

Huh....did you get that one from epicski?

Expert skiing generates expert level forces that are far beyond what a level III din setting can handle. Period.

Any expert skier on a level III din is not skiing agressively, and has specifically restricted their technique to the lower release threshold of the binding.

 

[steamboat1]

I have no idea how my bindings are set. All I know is I've been skiing on these skis for 4 seasons (soon to be 5) & have never popped out of the bindings. I don't even know if they work. Believe me I do my share of pounding.

 

[Smellytele]

So an average, semi-athletic, semi-agressive, advanced level tele skier falls about half as many times as an alpine skier?

We have other issues.