Pollard "Sneaker Min Width" Theory

O

oldkook

New member
Line says on theor site that Pollard believes that no ski should have a width narrower than your sneakers. For me, that would be roughly a 107 min width. Is this a stability thing, where the added balance compensates for extra time edge to edge unless you're racing or,say, in the pipe?

Thx!
 
I think it means Pollard, being in love with fat skis, wants other people to be in love with fat skis too(as they should be). It's basically him liking the idea of fat skis, providing balance, and all of that fun jazz.
 
So nothing functional added on the groomed/park, just that he can ski them there and likes the added width for when soft snow is available too, and/or has a thing with bouyancy and displacement. And nuthin wrong with that. I think I get it.
 
Pollard is my hero. And my dad.Thank you Dad and Eric. Super nice dude, helped me out when I fucked up my knee skiing with him this winter. Forever indebted haha.

Whatever, fat skis are sick, rideable anywhere and then way more versatile.
 
Your feet are wide for stability , plus your used to it why would you want a smaller "base" than what your on normally?Your used to having a 107 underfoot then why would you change it down to 95?
 
fat skis are the future of skiing. The construction/flex/sidecuts are so different compared to old school skinny straight skis that you are now able to ride fat skis in any condition, on either coast.
 
im wondering if it might have something to do with the transmision of power to the skis edges you get when you roll your ankles over to carve, like theres no point in hving something any nappower than that since its the optimal place to have your edge when you roll yourankles over to carve a turn
 
I think it's much simpler than all that, Pollard loves fat sticks, he loves to ride powder and land huge airs in the back country, you need fat skis for the type of riding he does...although I'm not ruling anything out, he could like them cause of the carving aspect...I just don't see that being the reason he loves fat skis so much.
 
I think pollards attitude is, he wants skis to become fatter overall, i mean if you look at snowboards, a 151 jib board still floats in powder 10x better than a pair of 175 troublemakers and both are as park specific as it gets.
 
haha yeah i know i over thought a little, i was just saying that because on the site when it mentions it its talking about on groomers and they kinda imply that hes got a big explination for it when they said something like "seriouly, evn ask him"

and about the leverage, you can only have more leverage the higher you are lifted off the ski, a narower ski only makes it eaisier to transition from turn to turn quickly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top