I couldn't help but wonder if the term "wide stance" or "athletic stance" isn't as dated as uphill\downhill ski.
"Wide stance" in sport has mostly been a one dimensional concept- having the feet hip to shoulder width apart in the vertical plane bisecting the body front to back and the ground beneath the athlete "flat", or basically perpendicular to the bisecting plane. In this position the femurs are "A-framed", or forming a pyramid with the ground. It is possible to maintain a triangulated relationship while turning on a ski slope, but it's highly undesirable (puts both skis on inside edge).
Based on femur position during intense inclination\angulation (when properly executed), the femurs are more parallel, making the "stance" in the traditional vertical plane "narrow". If you were to raise the skier perpendicular to the slope without changing the leg or foot positions (i.e. eliminate the inclination), the skier would be standing on one leg with the other foot mid-air at knee level, very close to the knee of the extended leg. Changing nothing other than the angle of the "ground" the skier is in a narrow stance in the bisected shoulder-hip plane described above.
Since so many dimensions are now in play with upper level skiing, maybe "stance" needs to give way to "dynamic foot\leg position" or some other reference term. For me, the word "stance" is a rather static term anyway.
Bookmarks