# Why are bindings mounted in the center of a snowboard?



## StAntonRider (Dec 15, 2014)

Please don't flame on past events im past that bullshit. 

But why are snowboard bindings mounted on the center of the board? by law of physics you would have to put in much less force to get the same elevation on edge of the bindings were mounted near the edges, but not too close. 

I think this might be the next thing in board tech. I don't see any downside. You can even get more board flex underfoot.


----------



## StAntonRider (Dec 15, 2014)

Imgur Diagram


----------



## speedjason (May 2, 2013)

I have no idea what you are talking about.
You mean moving the mounting screws to the edges?
I think it has something to do with the discs to be able to adjust angle. You can only make the discs so big that it covers the entire width of the bindings before they start to limit the angles you can adjust, by laws of physics as well.


----------



## Phedder (Sep 13, 2014)

I'm 100% convinced this idiot is just a pure troll now.


----------



## david_z (Dec 14, 2009)

The location of the screws isn't what allows you to pressure your edges, really... also this would destroy the bindings ability to really flex with the board.

otherwise then we would expect to see a trend the EXACT OPPOSITE of what has actually been happening wrt binding tech, which is in short: reduced footprint of the mounting disc AND the binding chassis itself to permit more subtle movements. It's not just Burton's EST/ICS interface but the various micro discs and reduced chassis designs offered by Ride, NOW, Union, Rome, just to name a few.


----------



## kumimajava (Oct 11, 2011)

Troll or not, there are actually people who advocate a non-central mounting of the bindings. Google 'gilmour bias' (named after John Gilmour, a rather highly regarded snowboarding coach).

The idea is that you have your front-foot biased off centre to give a bit more heel-overhang, and adjust the rear foot for more toe-overhang. This means that your stance is not aligned with the centreline of the board, and gives you better control over carving aggressively. Not really a good idea if you're doing tricks or riding switch, but if laying out aggressive carves is what you're interested in, the idea has its proponents. Why not give it a go?


----------



## Manicmouse (Apr 7, 2014)

I think he means that the heel and toe edge of the base plate both go to the edge of the board. Instead of toes and heels sticking out of the bindings they are within.

Bindings go fairly close to the edges already and if you rotate them with this idea you would risk have binding overhang...

Best look at what Now are doing to exert more pressure on the edges, or stop smoking crack :happy:


----------



## kumimajava (Oct 11, 2011)

Manicmouse said:


> I think he means that the heel and toe edge of the base plate both go to the edge of the board. Instead of toes and heels sticking out of the bindings they are within.


ah, if so, then it's actually already being done. For race boards, where you really do want maximum edge control, the past few years have seen the emergence of additional 'binding mounting plates' (e.g. the Vist and Hagl plates). In the links below, notice the extra inserts in a single line near the edges, beyond the standard 4x2 pack.

Have a look here:
Kessler Ski & Snowboards

and here:

http://allboardssports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/SG-pro-w-plate.jpg


http://allboardssports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/jjsb-plate1-620x241.jpg

The binding holes for the 'plate' are very near the heel and toe edges; the plate is usually torsionally very stiff. Bindings are then mounted to the plate, and indeed as you press on them, the power gets pushed nearer the edge. Because the plate is mounted to the board near the edges only, the board can indeed flex more underfoot. This is a bit like the Now-binding idea, taken to an extreme.

So it is already being done, but probably not necessary for most of the riding we're doing


----------



## Jimi77 (Feb 15, 2015)

kumimajava said:


> Troll or not, there are actually people who advocate a non-central mounting of the bindings. Google 'gilmour bias' (named after John Gilmour, a rather highly regarded snowboarding coach).
> 
> The idea is that you have your front-foot biased off centre to give a bit more heel-overhang, and adjust the rear foot for more toe-overhang. This means that your stance is not aligned with the centreline of the board, and gives you better control over carving aggressively. Not really a good idea if you're doing tricks or riding switch, but if laying out aggressive carves is what you're interested in, the idea has its proponents. Why not give it a go?


Interesting. I used to carve a lot and this bias would also rotate your body to face more downhill, which is what most carvers prefer. I may have to give it a try some day.


----------



## scotty100 (Apr 3, 2012)

StAntonRider said:


> Please don't flame on past events im past that bullshit.
> 
> But why are snowboard bindings mounted on the center of the board? by law of physics you would have to put in much less force to get the same elevation on edge of the bindings were mounted near the edges, but not too close.
> 
> I think this might be the next thing in board tech. I don't see any downside. You can even get more board flex underfoot.


What past events? Go on I'm bored...


----------



## ridinbend (Aug 2, 2012)

scotty100 said:


> What past events? Go on I'm bored...


Well first his board just naturally creased, but it's only cosmetic.

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/164817-dont-buy-ultra-aviator.html

Then he wanted to hook us up with a killer deal.

http://www.snowboardingforum.com/bu...0450-fs-insane-jones-ultra-aviator-156-a.html


----------



## Jimi77 (Feb 15, 2015)

ridinbend said:


> Well first his board just naturally creased, but it's only cosmetic.
> 
> http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/164817-dont-buy-ultra-aviator.html
> 
> ...


This guy is a winner.


----------



## Wiredsport (Sep 16, 2009)

There was a time...


----------



## scotty100 (Apr 3, 2012)

ridinbend said:


> Well first his board just naturally creased, but it's only cosmetic.
> 
> http://www.snowboardingforum.com/boards/164817-dont-buy-ultra-aviator.html
> 
> ...


Wow.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

Ok I'm going to try and answer some questions that should be clarified.

First off. 

The bindings are mounted in the center of the board so the diameter of the 4x4 disc could be small. When in 1986 Sims made the FE SERIES whee you would move your bindings along an arc of holes in th board and binding . Your stance was limited. When the disc is small the disc can fit within the footplate. There is no other reason for it, plate bindings had tear out issues by the pro riders at times, so I suggested at SIA in about 1994 ( for Madd , Bomber, Catek, Prior, and some others) that we introduce an extra two rows of inserts so the binding could be backwards compatible and still allow for holes further apart to reduce stress on just 4 inserts a paltry 4cm apart putting a great deal of stress in an area that is about 16cm squared plus a little extra area immediately surrounding each insert. 

In my -backwards compatible- mounting scheme you would use one of the regular 4x4 rows of holes as well as 6 other inserts in a hexagon surrounding the binding to better distribute load and also reduce or eliminate something we call "binding suck" where binding inserts literally pull the board upwards causing a cavity beneath the binding. Not just because of the tightness of the screws and the resultant gap between the disc and board, in the proposed binding pattern there was considerably more area as well as more screws allowing for redundancy if they were to pull out or become loose (Several World Cup racers who have torn out in key events might have been able to complete their runs without even noticing a insert failure ) in the 4x4 pattern losing one insert greatly increases the force on the others. In an 8 screw mounting scheme ( 6 around the perimeter and two in the center ) losing one screw is likely negligible.

Speed of selecting stance angle would be the same because you would just use the 4. X 4 pattern when selecting your stance and add the other screws afterwards.

Ok next question. 

2. Gilmour Bias.

There is a lot of confusion as to why it is done and why it works . The reasons are both simple mechanics, and biomechanical in nature.

First off, your board is More than just a curved carving knife, it is also a lever. All levers have a fulcrum which essentially is the edge of the board. Because nothing is solidly fixed in space when moving down the hill with respect to the snow and the lever there is vibrating which can unset the edge of the amplitude of the vibrations become large relative to the person... So "Hop and chopping out". Or "catching a jackhammer" is bad, instead of a smooth micro slide.

If the BOARD has leverage on YOU then your ankles and muscles and tendons must overcome the forces exerted on them to control the board . A ridiculous example would be if your heel was inset from the edge of the board by 4 inches.. It would be very hard to get the board up on edge...because the board has leverage on you...and also if the board does finally and suddenly get up on edge it feels unstable while somewhat on edge because your point of control is 4 inches away from the point of snow contact ( the fulcrum point) . 

So "Gilmour bias" effectively strives to put the part of your foot that gives you the best edge angle control variation DIRECTLY OVER the FULCRUM IE. SNOW contacting the metal edge,

In this case scenario, the board has the minimum leverage on your ankle joint, and you have maximal control.

So what are those points? 

So stand on a carpet or layer a couple of towels on the floor so you don't hurt your bare foot.

Now if you balance on the rear of your heel and change your heel angle, you'll find you don't have a huge amount of balance and recovery available to you... This is just because of our own biomechanics. It's why, for instance in a fighting stance you are somewhat sideways to your opponent in martial arts . It's also why in martial arts people strive to get your balance back on the center of your heels because they can control you easier when you have little ability to recover your balance quickly and precisely.

So you can try balancing on your heels at different angles, and you'll find that you can balance and recover your balance pretty effectively on the edge of th heel of the front foot that somewhat corresponds to you best riding angle for carving.

That's because of the way our ankle and the rest of our body is able to compensate for balance.

So if you take this point of your heel and put it directly over the part of the edge contacting the snow... You will have optimal balance. Now..some people talk about the exterior of the boot in relation to the edge of the board.. In fact this is not what you should use as a guide.

If you were to design a boot with a incredibly thin lip of plastic around your heel you would not move your heel further out away from the edge to center your boot. And conversely if your boot heel were say an 1/2 inch overhanging your heel you would not move in your heel a 1/2 inch. 

So let's talk toes...

If you were wearing ballet shoes and wanted to intentionally destroy the structure of your foot you would try to balance on your tip toes. you can convince vain people to do anything for attention...

But we actually derive balance closer to where the toes meet the foot. A great deal of our balance is from the ball of our foot when we face square ahead ( such as in tennis) but when we stand side stance our balance ranges from the parts of our foot that can musculary work INDEPENDENT of each other. 

Try this..

Take your bare foot and curl all toes down at once lie making a foot fist...and simultaneously try to adjust your ankles Dorsiflexion. It will be stiff and robotic like. Because your biomechanics start to freeze our your ankles dexterity when your foot is making a fist.

Try for instance using your hand fingers straight out and see how easily quickly and SMOOTHLY you can adjust your wrist angle. Now curl your fingers like you would curl your toes tightly ( not quite a BALL LIKE fist) and try to move your wrist angle quickly and accurately ... You can't do nearly as well.

So in order to have great balance recovery and ironically power , you. Need to not curl your ALL YOUR toes when snowboarding, and ideally your toes should be able to transfer weight independently for ideal articulation and dexterity in balance...

BUT..



.....THEY DONT. 

Piano players can move their fingers independtly very well,, but we can't move our toes independent of one another well. 

SO WHAT EXACTLY CAN WE DO EASILY? Let's pretend for moment that we want to play the piano with our toes ( humor me) while at the same time maintaining excellent ankle dexterity ( our ankles are key for balance and balance recovery) well you can see you can press down with :

1 your big toe alone
2 your big toe and pinky toe at the same time with toes 2,3,4 up
3 toes 2,3,4 down with toe 5 barely contributing and toe 1 up
4 ,big toe down and toes 2,3,4 up

Surprisingly if you measure the force... And stability .....the big toe and toes 3,4 work well independent of one another,

Which is why REAR toes 3,4 should be aligned along the edge where the board and boot has least leverage ( ball of foot and big toe are inbound of the fulcrum and of little use) which is where the toes come close to being at that fulcrum edge. Measure the force you can make with your toes and you will see it is maximized about two knuckles in from the tips of your toes... SERIOUSLY CHECK IT OUT. 

(I THOUGHT ABOUT THIS WAY TOO MUCH ON BORING CHAIRLIFT RIDES ALONE MIDWEEK.)

So that is what should be directly over the rear toe edge. Where toes 3,4 are about 1/2- 1/4 inch away from the sole of the foot.

Now that you have minimized the leverage the board has on you, and you have maximized your balance and power delivery to the board, you can ride aggressively even in soft boots.

Google " Gilmour Doppler" and then click on the YouTube link to see my other videos . I'm on a powder board with. A bad strap and even a slightly sprained ankle and still can set the edge with some authority and maintain control at a high rate of speed with my body away from the board .

I could not possibly ride like this without good Gilmour bias.

Furthermore, Gilmour bias offsets each foot relative to the longitudinal centerline of the board. This gives you more lateral balance and the possibility of very fast edge changes. 

Humans have been stepping side to side for millennia. Our hips have evolved for this. And we can step from side to side quicker than we can transfer our weight from the balls of our toes to our heels. So Gilmour bias allows you to use a diagonal stepping motion to quickly change edges.

Same thing exists on skateboarding when people race tight slalom in a stance called " modified parallel " , 

essentially

I step from the outside edge of the front heel to the rear toes 3,4 very quickly to navigate cones at about 5-6 per second. It happens so quickly that ther is little movement of my center of mass..so balance isn't that much of an issue in skateboarding as it is in snowboarding. Which is why skateboarders have a more difficult time snowboarding than snowboarders have in learning skateboarding.

In both skateboarding and snowboarding Gilmour bias allows your hips to face more forward- so you can step left right faster, and reduce your blind spots... There is a sacrifice... Landing once airborne..or half pipe.. You lose some stability when landing so you compensate by sighting your landing carefullya, and not panicking, ( panic that's the hard part.) 

Sermon over..

One good turn deserves another..


----------



## SnowDragon (Apr 23, 2012)

John Gilmour said:


> Ok I'm going to try and answer some questions that should be clarified.
> 
> First off.
> 
> ...


Wow.
Can't wait for your second post! :blahblah:


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

GreyDragon said:


> Wow.
> Can't wait for your second post! :blahblah:


Haha, well you're gonna have too, it won't be until 2017


TT


----------



## ETM (Aug 11, 2009)

finally some decent information on this forum of stupid kids and angry adults


----------



## david_z (Dec 14, 2009)

smartest thing I've read on the Internet in a long time!


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

I usually don't post on regular skateboarding and snowboarding forms – and only racing forums because there isn't really a lot of information on typical skateboarding and snowboarding forums it's mostly full of misinformation.

And I usually end up arguing with some pigheaded tractor driver ( or 14-20 year old ) who ultimately doesnt understand why things work and just feels threatened by having anyone with experience challenge him.

Why bother ? 

So I just coach a few people who are willing to try something new and want to leave their current plateau they have been stuck in for years.

If you don't think... You don't progress with direction or optimization, and you just end up carefully practicing the same mistake carefully over and over each day neuro mapping it like poor penmanship for years. 

I see some former top pros stuck in bad techniques. I've been stuck myself....more than once. ... Stuck for 3 years 86-89, stuck for 2 years 90-91. And even the last 2 years I feel stuck.

So I think and get unstuck. No one coaches me, I am always willing to think alongside the suggestions of others if they aren't just trial and error people.

People who want to know, they can figure out how to find me. If they can't figure out how to contact me they probably don't have the determination to get better by themselves either. It's a pretty good screener.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

Note that this only makes sense for aggressive positive angles on narrow alpine boards (like 20cm waists).

In case anyone is as dumb as me and tried to figure out what this was about using an all mountain board with a duck stance... :hairy:


If I'm understanding the concept, you can't Gilmour bias with a duck stance at all unless you amputate your first two toes.

Sometimes I still ponder about when everyone switched to duck like 10 years ago and whether or not it was the right thing to do biomechanically (aside from switch riding).


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

Terje H. qualified 1st in one of the mount baker races switch ridin with both feet angled forwards .

Duck is a weak stance in both directions.

In the Gilmour Doppler video I am riding a wide Powerboard a rossignol judge 168 with Union force doc soft bindings that are trashed... Using old Andy Warhol Burton soft boots. 

It's a really wide board.

Gilmour bias allows me to ride a shit carving deck this way.


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

Am I the only one that thinks the forward carving stance looks ridiculous and only serves the purpose of carving down a mountain and limits SOOOO much of what makes snowboarding fun and different. Its basically skiing on a single ski. 

It's impossible to have style riding like that. Might as well tuck your dick between your legs and rock a mangina while wearing a head band and sunglasses with highlights in your hair. 

Or did I miss something?


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

What kind of tractor do you have?

Back to other websites..over and out.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

Don't worry, we can't stand him either.


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

John Gilmour said:


> What kind of tractor do you have?
> 
> Back to other websites..over and out.


Calm down. It is just my opinion and everyone has a different one. 



jtg said:


> Don't worry, we can't stand him either.


Is that directed at me?


----------



## deagol (Mar 26, 2014)

Mystery2many said:


> Am I the only one that thinks the forward carving stance looks ridiculous and only serves the purpose of carving down a mountain and limits SOOOO much of what makes snowboarding fun and different. Its basically skiing on a single ski.
> 
> It's impossible to have style riding like that. Might as well tuck your dick between your legs and rock a mangina while wearing a head band and sunglasses with highlights in your hair.
> 
> Or did I miss something?


depends on how "forward" we are talking. But, this is an over-reaction. One could (but would not necessarily) say the same thing about duck.. but why do people get so bothered by other people's stances?

I rode with Neni's husband who has a very forward stance and anyone talking this much shit about it would feel like a fool after watching him. Can't have any style? he was the most stylistic rider I have seen in years. Used same stance riding the heli-accessed steep in AK. 

Throwing such strong and derogatory opinions like this around can backfire, as you may have to eat your words someday.

case in point: Craig Kelly rode +27°/+12°. enough said


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

I was referring to this kind of stance and riding. I see it out here a lot and I feel it limits your riding experience and style. Looks like its strictly for carving and going fast. I seen Neni's video and he looks nothing like what I'm talking about.


----------



## deagol (Mar 26, 2014)

Mystery2many said:


> I was referring to this kind of stance and riding. I see it out here a lot and I feel it limits your riding experience and style. Looks like its strictly for carving and going fast. I seen Neni's video and he looks nothing like what I'm talking about.


Ok, fair enough... I would not ever wanna ride angles that steep unless on a hard boot and plate setup.

Using angles like that on a wider freeride board seems like you would have no leverage to get on edge and it would tweak your ankles. Also, you would probably slide right off the side of your highbacks when trying to go heelside. 

I've never seen anyone with those angles on a non-plate setup


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

Steamboat has a ton of these guys going 60+ down the groomers while its crowded. I'd still rather see those guys than skiers because at least they don't make mogul bumps.


----------



## jtg (Dec 11, 2012)

Mystery2many said:


> Calm down. It is just my opinion and everyone has a different one.
> 
> 
> 
> Is that directed at me?


Yeah, we had what was the first sign of a technical discussion in a long time going and you derailed it with that dumbass comment and scared off someone with a clue.


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

Well I'm sorry, that was not my intention. That's also pretty damn weak to run away because of a single person's opinion. If he's so fucking smart and wise he should have the depth to over look ignorance and opposing opinions with ease.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

Hey Mystery2many- Im in Aspen again...late start on the season.

I wouldnt mind checking out steamboat if you feel like riding. I haven't bought my Aspen Pass yet. 
and to everyone else..

Seems like everytime I buy a season pass the season goes tp crap and everytime I work and get a free pass it's an awesome season.
The Main season pass irony was being an owner of Madd Snowboards I got free passes and everytime I went to do a alpine carving demo it would dump and ruin the demo...nearly every time...



Realistically, having lived through the birth of snowboarding, and its "evolution" (I use the word "EVOLUTION" to mean that most progress seems to be COMPLETELY RANDOM in nature) we have seen so many designs come and go.

I still coach, and my coaching style is very different from the norm.

Most coaches tell their student to meet them, try to doing anything with their existing set up to improve their riding (gain trust in coaching knowledge ) , and often NEVER change any of the riders settings.

Snowboarding is a *Man Machine interface*, it ain't fuckn' tennis, you have a machine bolted to you...it doesn't come off. Its almost a crucifixion.

So it's important that you FIT the machine to the body. Becuse if you don't the machine will work on you not vice versa, and we are soft tissue.

SO why in the world would anyone want to take a piano player who is poory fitted by himself for a artifical arm and try to teach him to play better, then after a season, try to refit the arm and retrain him- trying to break bad habits? Its like trying to learn two similar but different languages at the same time , like Portuguese and Spainish OR Portuguese and French... it just make for a huge cluster---- of confusion.

So my approach is:

1. Fit the bindings to the rider INDIVIDUAL JOINT MOBILITY and BODY BUILD, and FLEXABILITY, and BALANCE, and oddly "Nerve/guts/committment".
2. Teach the rider what matters to the snow and the board ... it's not a day at the disco... it's actually a careful TRANSLATION of body mechanics through a machine to give edge the shape the snow wants to see for highest performance.. and if means sticking your right thumb in your left ear while blinking... its what you do . GEICO ad over.
3. Understand "recovery zone" and how to enhance it. 

And only after that is done... do I place a person on the snow.

======


If someone told me what I tell everyone else when I coach them I would have thought "What an idiot, he's wacked, what an oddball, "freak of nature"...it will never work for me." and I'd go and find someone else preaching what 90% of the people agree upon, and try that instead. What the heck is he talking about "what the snow sees" is he some new age flake or what? 

Well, the snow doesn't care what's on the board . Using a remote control you could design bunch of movable weights on a snowboard deck that could carve insanely well. And if you were to NOW move those weights in an asymetrical "Sub Optimal configuration" there still would exist an "optimal program" to get the most performance out of those aysmetically placed weights to allow it to ride better.

And the program for telling the baord to go right would be different from the program to tell the board to go left. VERY DIFFERENT.

*We are the Asymtrically placed sub optimal weight configuration. 
*
And its worse still because of biomechanics whci are not only asymmetric but weaker in certain movements than others. For instance people typically have more power with their sholders with internal rotation than external rotation... are muscles dont work equally powerfully in both directions.

So we have to compensate with the bindings position to help us translate our forces efficiently through the board, and also to help our bodys "weaker positions". to find the best possible and profitable tradeoffs.

Lots of things are wrong with snowboarding. IMHO more things are wrong with snowboarding than are done properly. 

So getting your bindings right. well its clearly more than 85% of the battle. There are a few athletes who can compensate - almost like a cat on crack, and can make anything work. I am not one of those people.


So be patient in your binding set up. It isn't all +21 and -12.

Get a "china marker" wax pencil and mark your settings. Mark each stance you are comparing in different colors SO IT IS EXACTLY REPEATABLE.

For those people who spend more than 40% of their time in the park or slopestyle - go duck. Because even though it is a biomechanically weaker stance, your switch riding is easier to comprehend. You could do most everything with both feet forward but all switch moves requirine all new learning. 

If you spend less than 20% of your time in the park... or nearly none. riding duck IMHO is a major compromise of your ability since you are mostly facing forwards downhill. 

As far as I know there are no duck stance skateboard downhillers, no duck stance skateboard slalomers...and the stance would be INSTANT and easy to change. I change stances midcourse when racing...but no one goes duck.


----------



## Manicmouse (Apr 7, 2014)

Oh god not this thread again


----------



## Argo (Feb 25, 2010)

That is a great, technical and actually intelligent post. 

But seriously, not riding yet? Wth....


----------



## Mizu Kuma (Apr 13, 2014)

John Gilmour said:


> If you spend less than 20% of your time in the park... or nearly none. riding duck IMHO is a major compromise of your ability since you are mostly facing forwards downhill.
> 
> As far as I know there are no duck stance skateboard downhillers, no duck stance skateboard slalomers...and the stance would be INSTANT and easy to change. I change stances midcourse when racing...but no one goes duck.


One difference is that those guys don't ride switch though!!!!! 

Nor are they boosting off hits, throwin a grab in here and there!!!!! 

Or riding deep powder where pressure is sometimes exerted to the back foot in order for a bit of tail riding!!!!!


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

Mizu Kuma said:


> One difference is that those guys don't ride switch though!!!!!
> 
> Nor are they boosting off hits, throwin a grab in here and there!!!!!
> 
> Or riding deep powder where pressure is sometimes exerted to the back foot in order for a bit of tail riding!!!!!


 


Mizu Kuma said:


> One difference is that those guys don't ride switch though!!!!!
> 
> Nor are they boosting off hits, throwin a grab in here and there!!!!!
> 
> Or riding deep powder where pressure is sometimes exerted to the back foot in order for a bit of tail riding!!!!!


My stance set up refers to soft boot set ups more than hardboot.
Hardboots have a ton of leverage, so even though it's harder to find a stance that just works, when you get in the ball park you can use the leverage to your advantage. 

Soft boots have less leverage so in order to get real performance on harder snow yet have to g et the settings even more accurate than hardboots.

Hardboots don't mean you can't bust out stuff. Even decades ago Damain Saunders was hitting double backflips in hardboots, and Tom Burt threw down some of the most insane descents.

I ride both. ...just like it's sorta pointless to take a road bike on a mountain bike trail, it's just as silly to run a mountain bike in the Tour de France. 

The are times when the snow on the East Coast gets so firm that it's nearly impossible to get an edge in in soft boots, and an impact means a concussion or worse. Those are to break out the hardboots, metal carving bindings, and carving decks made for hard snow. The harder set up can make what would have been a scraping boring day on soft boots , a rip roaring F1 race fest pulling 2 G's on hardboots.



There are also bottomless powder days when having one of those set up feels like a boat anchor. And even a nice free ride set up rides poorly compared to a real powder deck.

Just like the are tons of people who commute on Mountain Bikes because they prefer the look, even ought their bike never sees dirt, same goes for people who prefer the look and feel of a freestyle board and yet just want to cruise the hill at speed.

My point is...why wouldn't you ride what works best for the conditions and riding you do?
Why wouldn't you want a board that is optimized for your riding?
Why wouldn't you want your bindings set up best for your particular riding?

So I did a long test. 

For years when I was riding Race boards I designed or BX decks, people would give me saying that the $$$$ board was responsible for the riding.

So I wanted to show that if you had a decent technique you could ride well on just about anything so long as the boots and bindings were set up properly for the style of riding you wanted to do.

Of course that doesn't mean riding Duck on a race board with your toes hanging off 5 inches was going to work, but I took a powder deck that was way too wide for my feet and set up soft boot bindings ( decent ones 2007 UNION FORCE DLX) and some inexpensive but decent fitting lace up soft boots with a true detached articulated cuff (Burton Andy Warhols - basically a Hale boot) and then dialed in an aggressive carving stance - nearly a hardboot stance, on this split tail powder board.

It has a purpose...in that if I bump into carving friends I can carve with them on steep hardback trails like Aztec and back of Bell 2 in Aspen, or Ride powder. And even get up a head of steam on. Hardback trail and charge up the side to get to fresh untracked snow..,which no one could do on a powder deck because they couldn't carve fast enough into it or a carving deck because the nose would submarine.

It is NOT a park machine.

It's just to show that it can be done...and that stance means more than you would think. And believe me... The board doesn't carve well at all.... I could ride a junior rental board better.

Google "Gilmour Doppler". I'm practicing some heel side turns and seeing how much you can push the set up before it fails. You can freeze frame it to see it is a split tail powder deck, and conform I'm in those bindings and soft boots and board.


It was shot with an iPhone 5 (and the wide angle lens kills speed) so I'm making noise so your can hear when it changes in pitch that I am accelerating while in the turn...because I'm in the " ground effect" so when I touch down I'm hitting 1/2 as much wind resistance ( similar to how an avalanche can roll faster down hill than snow can fall or why birds fly next to cliffs or dolphins travel beside a boat because the resistance is less). I can hit close to 65+ in a carve in excellent conditions. This one I'm doing about 50+ I pass ....you can hear the sound reverberate in the valley .

There's more to snowboarding than going fast, a lot more, but no matter what you are doing there isn't just one stance or one board ...though I am trying to design a more versatile board to do more.


----------



## timmytard (Mar 19, 2009)

Cool, I like it.

Are you on Facebook there John?


TT


----------



## Mystery2many (Aug 14, 2013)

John Gilmour said:


> Hey Mystery2many- Im in Aspen again...late start on the season.
> 
> I wouldnt mind checking out steamboat if you feel like riding. I haven't bought my Aspen Pass yet.
> and to everyone else..


I'll definitely ride with you. Come on up. Keep in mind that my riding style is freestyle with spins, butters, jumping and all the powder tree runs I can get till my legs fall off. I can bomb runs as well and lay a nice trencher but that doesn't really fullfil my needs for riding. What makes Steamboat special is its rough terrain, tree skiing, rock drops and powder. I only use the groomers to get to different sections of trees, powder and hidden gems unless the conditions are sun baked cement then its a groomer day. Beaver Creek has the best groomers I've ridden.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

John Haines Gilmour is my FB


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

I'm adding a deck to my quiver. For exactly tree riding, you're talking about and tighter spots...to replace a salmon sick stick which was my pow deck for trees and soft moguls.

WANTING SOMETHING LIGHT AND SHORTER than the 168 Rossignol Judge.

So far Bindings are Union FC.
BOOTS MIGHT BE THIRTY TWO 
Board might be Jones ULTRACRAFT split or I might design my own

The Union FC has a slight design flaw as you can either rotate OR extend or contract the heel cup but not both.

I'd definitely run flatter angles on such a wide deck and try more bias.


----------



## Mig Fullbag (Apr 15, 2014)

John Gilmour said:


> I'm adding a deck to my quiver. For exactly tree riding, you're talking about and tighter spots...to replace a salmon sick stick which was my pow deck for trees and soft moguls.
> 
> WANTING SOMETHING LIGHT AND SHORTER than the 168 Rossignol Judge.
> 
> ...


Sent you a PM John.


----------



## Chimbulak (Feb 5, 2014)

John - I'm pretty comfortable carving in duck stance, but after reading your posts I want to try carving in a forward stance and with a Gilmour bias. What are your suggested angles for a typical rider to start with? BTW, I ride Slayblade, which is a good stiff bomber deck.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

Angles depend on your boot size , type of boot, foot size, binding type and brand and finally board width- taking into account waist width amount and type of sidecut, board taper and nose flare.

There's more to it than just a certain amount of overhang, bias, and angle.

Some bindings , like Burton have a fat heel cup with a lip that limits your heelside edging. In that case you have to swap into a binding without issues.

Post what you have and a few shots of your boots in your bindings. 

Finally, there is a joint mobility check after you are set up to check to see no joint hits a " stop" in movement suddenly before the rest of your joints. You don't want a single joint to bear any brunt of force in a wipeout or for "repetitive stress" from regular turning.

I used to dial people in via Skype. Not perfectly ideal, but I got pretty good at it by doing locals that way and then confirming the settings face to face on the hill. I haven't done as much recently since I took some time off.

Globally it's fun because I dial people in from New Zealand, Austrailia, in the off season.


----------



## Snow Hound (Jul 21, 2012)

I've a related question about forward stance for anyone who cares to help. I was taught with a forward stance but switched to 26/0 then 20/6ish a good few years ago. One of my now mostly banished bad habits was to ride with shoulders open. I can see how forward stance helps with power but it wouldn't it also encourage open riding? Surely full duck would help with getting hips and shoulders inline with the board? I'm considering going forward on my next trip but don't want that particular bad habit (I've others to work on) and the resulting face plants to return.


----------



## ridinbend (Aug 2, 2012)

Snow Hound said:


> Surely full duck would help with getting hips and shoulders inline with the board?


This has always been the case for me when I ride. The few rare times I have tried a forward stance, I do not feel balanced on my board. However all the years of surfing also played a roll in my back foot being ducked out. Nobody on a short board rides with their back foot(+). You have to be able to transfer energy to the tail, which is where most of the turning occurs since the fins are, well, under the tail. This weekend I randomly swapped boards for the day, and kept the back foot angle at the -6 angle, which was a big change from -18, and the only thing I noticed was a bit more energy edge to edge right beneath my back foot. I also had a bit more control in the air. However most days I'm riding powder and don't want that much power under my back foot and prefer the energy transfer to the tail that occurs more with my duck -18 angle on my back foot. But this is preference and gives me much more control when slashing pillows like they are a lip. Make any sense?


----------



## Chimbulak (Feb 5, 2014)

John Gilmour said:


> Post what you have and a few shots of your boots in your bindings.


John, thanks for responding. Specs: the board: 2014 164 K2 Slayblade - directional twin, effective edge - 1294.6, tip and tail width - 305.4, waist width - 256, sidecut radius - 8.2, precision lifted technology (K2's version of camber) (K2 Slayblade Snowboard 2014 | evo outlet). Boots: 2016 Ride Insano 11 size (flex rating - 9), foot size - 287 mm. Bindings - Burton Cartel (M).

Myself: 215 lbs, 5.10'. I don't think I have any mobility issues. I understand you cannot suggest precise angles without seeing me etc., but it'd be great to know what would be your initial suggested range of angles as a starting point for board/boots/bindings with such specs? Just a rough indication. 

Thanks again.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

The Ride Insano looks to be a good boot though I haven't checked it out in person. I prefer the Union bindings to the Cartel. Cartel is a fantastic binding for high speed skidded turns over clumpy snow. It's a lot of plastic . I prefer the Union bindings over anything else so far, the dampening is amazing...which isn't just great for speed, but also for poor snow conditions.

Still need. Pics of your boots clamped in, shots of the underside of the toe on the edge, and heel edge. 

What's your inseam length? Also tibia length from bottom of heel to the center point of your knee hinge?


----------



## shitty shredder (Feb 6, 2016)

Snow Hound said:


> I've a related question about forward stance for anyone who cares to help. I was taught with a forward stance but switched to 26/0 then 20/6ish a good few years ago. One of my now mostly banished bad habits was to ride with shoulders open. I can see how forward stance helps with power but it wouldn't it also encourage open riding? Surely full duck would help with getting hips and shoulders inline with the board? I'm considering going forward on my next trip but don't want that particular bad habit (I've others to work on) and the resulting face plants to return.


This guy seems to ride open, and advocate doing so, and seems to know what he is doing. Maybe open shoulders is fine?


----------



## Snow Hound (Jul 21, 2012)

shitty shredder said:


> This guy seems to ride open, and advocate doing so, and seems to know what he is doing. Maybe open shoulders is fine?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvADH_dLb4w


Not when riding straight/flat basing. Thanks though, I'll make sure I ride just like Knapton next time I'm up.


----------



## shitty shredder (Feb 6, 2016)

John Gilmour said:


> 2. Gilmour Bias.
> 
> There is a lot of confusion as to why it is done and why it works . The reasons are both simple mechanics, and biomechanical in nature.
> 
> ...


This really needs a diagram  I read it like 5 times and don't know if I get it. I think you're basically saying to move the rear foot towards the toe side and the front foot towards the heel side?

On my carpet, I actually feel like the opposite is more comfortable, because you get the benefits of the improved balance, but aren't over-rotated as much. I feel like with the front foot more heel biased, I'd be more likely to hook and catch the toe edge.


----------



## stillz (Jan 5, 2010)

Open shoulders aren't necessarily "bad." You want an overall neutral position, as this will give you the most movement options, while minimizing stress on individual joints. With a symmetrical duck stance, I'd say the most neutral is shoulders and hips directly in line with the board. The more forward your stance angles are, the more open your neutral position will be.


----------



## John Gilmour (Feb 6, 2013)

shitty shredder said:


> This really needs a diagram  I read it like 5 times and don't know if I get it. I think you're basically saying to move the rear foot towards the toe side and the front foot towards the heel side?.


This one is correct.


----------

