Surfing/Skiing comparison
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...hlight=elitism
This post is in response to BlurredElevens request for more discussion on a comparison between Surfing and Skiing. Check out Odin's thread above for a good discussion on "elitism" in skiing.
OK, I intended to do a single post comparing the equipment, culture, thrill, learning curve, and other aspects of skiing and surfing. I started writing and before I'd exhausted everything I wanted to say about equipment, I'd produced a small thesis. As such, I stopped myself and decided to post what I've written and deliver my thoughts in a series of posts.
Surfing and skiing equipment have several similarities. There is a common confusion in both sports among the masses that board/ski length is the dispositive measurement. In surfing, length is but one component of the shape of a board. More important than length of the board is the interplay between the outline, foil, length, rocker, rail shape, length, width and thickness of the board. Outline is what it sounds like, the basic shape of the board as it would be revealed if you made a chalk outline of it on the sidewalk. Foil is the distribution of foam thickness from nose to tail. Rocker is the amount of curve along the length of the board (commonly called "nose-kick" or "tail-kick"). More rocker = more maneuverability/less speed; less rocker = less maneuverability/more speed. Rail shape is self-explanatory but its importance is commonly underestimated and misunderstood.
Until about a month ago, 90% of surfboards were made of polyurethane core manufactured by Clark Foam. Do a web search or check Marcus Sanders coverage of it on www.surfline.com if you are interested in the full saga; suffice to say Clark Foam abruptly closed its doors a month ago and put the surfboard industry into a tailspin. Committed surfers worldwide are all very anxious about the fall-out that this will cause. That said, I'm going to discuss surfboard manufacturing as it has been as long as I've been involved in the sport. Where it goes from here is a giant question mark.
Surfboards are a much more primitive technology than skis. This is the result of a confluence between a surf culture that resists change and a general lack of a financing for R&D in surfboard design and materials. Unlike skiing, where equipment manufacturers appear to be very significant financial forces within the industry, surf industry money is concentrated in soft-goods manufacturers (primarily the "big 3": Quiksilver, Billabong and Rip Curl).
In skiing, big manufacturers mass-produce models of skis and sell them to the public. While the top surfboard manufacturers style and market "models" and have streamlined their production methods with CAD and some sophisticated shaping machines that rough-shape the foam cores, surfboards are still largely manufactured by hand.
For my part, I love the handmade quality of surfboards. I am friends with the guy who shapes my surfboards and talk to him in detail about how I want my boards. He is a "ghost shaper" for Rusty Priesendorfer (a big-time shaper who also has a popular clothing label with an "R-Dot" logo). As such, I have direct access to a world class equipment manufacturer that builds equipment, to exacting standards, specifically for me. I get the equipment for the same price as "stock boards." It would be cool if skis had this quality. Imagine if you could go ski with Splat, have him watch you ski all day, then go have a beer with him and discuss the exact specifications of the Bro model ski he would have tailor made for you in two weeks.
Of course the benefit of ski manufacturing is that the equipment is much more sophisticated. The equipment is made of modern materials and the controls over the manufacturing process are much more exacting. For example, the flex pattern of skis is apparently very precise. Flex pattern is much more of a crap shoot with surfboards, due to irregularities in the foam core manufacturing process, the glassing process, and a less scientific understanding of its importance by the manufacturing community at large. As such, it's very difficult to replicate the "magic board."
Another big problem with surfing equipment is that you can't generally "demo" a surfboard. Each time you dole out the $300-$800 for a new board, you're rolling the dice. It's a very fine line between "too buoyant" and "not buoyant enough", between "too much rocker" and "not enough rocker" etc. This dynamic, and the generally scroungy budget of the average surfer, contributes significantly to the general state of inertia in surfboard design. Once you get your specs dialed, you're terrified to stray.
In the early nineties, surfing experienced a radical change. Led by Kelly Slater, the "newschool" style of radical surfing took over. All of a sudden, every surfer wanted to ride the thin, narrow, heavily-rockered potato chips that Slater and his disciples were using. The problem was, only Cinderella could wear those glass slippers. The average pro surfer is probably 5'7" and 140 pounds. If you are 5'11" and 185 pounds, you shouldn't be using the same equipment as the average pro. The entire surfing community failed to recognize this and, for a few years, while the performance level of elite surfers skyrocketed, the performance at the average beachbreak plummeted. Everyone was bogging, unable to generate speed, failing to make sections.
Breaking this trend was collective frustration and a massive design renaissance that brought back old designs from the 60s, 70s and 80s. This led to the advent of the "quiver" for the average surfer. Extra boards aren't just for pros who charge macking Waimea, they are also for the average chump who needs a groveller when the local reef isn't quite pumping, as well as a semi-gun to get into the set waves when the local big wave spot is macking.
So, why is this relevant a relevant post to a ski site? For one, I'm replying to BlurredElevens request. Also, I learn best through analogy and surfing is the closest thing to skiing in my life and I think a comparison of the two will help me learn. Finally, I'm interested in hearing the reaction from maggots who read what I've written and can apply the general principles I describe to skiing.
So, please, submit your replies to this post. What are your thoughts on ski design? What is the best way for me to get my equipment dialed? What kind of ski-quiver should I look at to be able to approach the whole mountain and the range of conditions I'll find on the mountain? What are the limitations and advantages of ski design? Obviously, if you are a skier who is starting to surf and want any input at all, throw that in as well.
That's what I'm talkin' about!
My name's Nugget and I'm a magoholic. It's been 8 seconds since my last post.
I've been combing this board for about a month now and don't even know why I can't stop. I have my suspicions, however. I silently fantacize about skiing/surfing the better part of my waking hours - probably as often as Masters and Johnson opined most men think about sex (I also think about sex that often, which doesn't leave me much time to get anything done in my life). Because I know 99.99999999% of people find this type of discussion incredibly boring, and I generally don't like to be a burden on others, I endure most conversations with about 4% of my attention span, while the rest is devoted to thoughts such as those that are strewn like so much litter on this board.
So, now that that's off my chest. . .
LeeLau - thanks for the response! Here's the answer to your question:
I don't know! I want to do it all. I think I recall seeing you post on Odin's "elitism in the brotherhood of skiing" thread, so I think you've read a pretty robust account of my experience (if not, here's the Cliff Notes: very limited with one really epic trip that changed my life).
What I want to do is ski like Eric Hjorleifson does in "The Hit List" or Shane McConky does any of the other 6 videos I've been borrowing from Rusty Nails for the last month. I understand I might have to practice a bit, starting 25 years ago, and become a tad more talented.
I really enjoyed getting "off-piste." I had the most fun skiing away from the crowds and trying to work my way through more challenging terrain. With surfing as a background, I think I'm more maneuver-oriented in my thinking than the average maggot (I detect a distinct "go big, straight and fast - turning is for pussies" vibe on this site). However, I can appreciate a clean line. Also, being stuck in central VA until May (when I'll move back to CA), there aren't the pow days to be had at the local spot, so I'm going to try to learn to jib this season. I plan to ski mostly in UT, CO and CA when I get back to CA. I also expect to make some PNW trips as well as anywhere else that's appealing and feasible.
I'm 5'11" and 190 lbs. My quiver includes:
-174cm Rossi Scratch Sprayer BCs mounted with the Rossi Scratch Axial 120
binders.
-169cm K2 Fujatives with Look P12s (incoming now)
I'm sure this looks like some degree of overlap. However, I bought the Rossis as my main go-to ski and didn't want to thrash them with this year's jib experiment. I intended to buy a used set up for that purpose but found the Looks on ebay for $100 and got the Fugatives for $150 + ship through a PSA on Gear Swap about a shop sale. (Thanks again Infantile Egomaniac!) So I don't feel too bad about beating the crap out of them!
While I don't think I'll need them this year (because I won't be exposed to the right conditions and because I won't be good enough to rate them) I want to get a set good pow skis. I'm intrigued by the Bro model (just the buzz - I don't really have the knowledge to appreciate them intrinsically). I'm also very interested in getting a randonee set-up, skins and touring gear.
I hope this gives sufficient input to fill any blanks in your reco, LeeLau (& any one else who has .02 on this topic). Thanks again!
