So... are old women's FIS GS legal for men, next year?

[Primoz]

@checkracer honestly I don't keep track of injuries, so no real statistics from me But I have seen report from someone in medical team or something like this at Swiss ski team (I don't remember his exact and official position inside of Swiss team) stating number of knee injuries decreased significantly with new skis. Now if that is valid thing or not, I don't know, but I certainly hope he was operating with real data and not speculations. Either way, I would say it's too short period to have some real statistics out of this, as it can be just few good years with less injuries, or maybe it could really be changed skis have something to do with this.
One more thing with your list... You are listing all knee injuries, which is not really fair At leasts Razzoli, Marsaglia, Thalmann and Noens didn't injury their knees on GS skis. With Hector it wasn't really ski, as it would happen on any kind of ski, and if I remember right, also Fenninger's crash was slip on inside ski in knee injury was result of aftermath of crash (not 100% sure now if this was really so or not, as that's straight of my (bad) memory ).
@ScotsSkier honestly I can't say for sure. Personally I would say it didn't change much, as basically it really can't considering rules didn't change. Tracks are still same as they were, at least all traditional venues are exactly like they were, no changes in terrain or altitude of start/finish line. I don't remember a single of traditional courses that would get any facelift in last few years, which means they are as wide as they were 5 or 6 years ago, they are as long and as steep as they were. Considering rules about number of gates and min distance didn't change, it's quite hard to imagine there could be some drastic changes with settings, as pretty much everyone are complaining you need to set course really offset if you even want to succeed putting required number of gates to course. This means most of courses are still set to 20-25m max. What I would say it's changing a bit is preparation which is lately a bit less brutal icy then it was few years ago. But it could also be just weather as last few seasons winters over here are pretty weird, which also shows on chances for track preparation.

 

[Muleski]

What I hear is anecdotal. And it is very much in line with what @Primoz is hearing. Coaches, and athletes from the USST and CAST, along with the top North American club coaches seem to think that the types of knee injuries, which led to the increase in radius and length, are down. Are they down substantially? I have no idea. But there seems to be some consensus that "things are better." They probably have some basic information.

At the same time, the same crowd essentially says that "EVERY guy has some degree of back pain." Maybe not enough to miss even a single start, but maybe bad enough to miss a season. Again the consensus is that this is significant. It was not this way years ago. I hear a lot of people saying that we never saw so many back problems. Or maybe so much back strain?

I am led to believe that it is likely the result of a LOT of factors. Not just ski design. But the ski design changed, and it's easy to point to that as one factor, and one that can be reversed. So it sounds like the "balancing act" is to arrive at ski design that protects the knees, without the back wear and tear. 30M, 193cm.

Most of the ski federations, to my understanding have been concerned as well with the younger entry age FIS competitors. When the 35M rule was passed, all of the development went into 195cm skis. No energy to develop 190cm skis, or something that was shorter than the WC ski. That has made for tough transitions, and complaining. Probably very justified.

Last, I have a couple of friends who are in the media and market research. Fans like the huge challenge, thrills and I guess "danger" of the classic downhills. Makes sense. Evidently, there was a time, pretty recently when viewers really liked to watch men's GS. It was the kind of skiing that many envied and aspired to. Today, it is ugly. It's very different {for a lot of reasons} that watching the women {even with the depleted field right now}. It is a great test, but nobody calls it pretty.

That's my impression. I know that consumer research has been done on the TV. It is obviously in the hands of those who paid for it, but no doubt has been a part of some conversations and thinking. If you start with "Is a change good for the sport", you need to think of a lot of constituencies.

I, too would love to see any hard information on injuries. At the same time, I pretty much trust what I hear. May be not a lot fewer knees, but the back problems seem real. Whether a ski change will help, I guess we will see. Smarter, more involved people than me seem to think so, and they have the ski industry on board to make the changes. That piece is not insignificant.

Primoz and SS make good points about the hills and surfaces. Val D'Isere was a great example last week. The hill is a classic, and offers everything. The surface was hard, but I don't believe that it was a hockey rink. The same undulations and rolls have been there for years. You can bet that the challenge for the coursesetters {who have months to think about it, or at least ponder it} is as Primoz says actually fitting in the minimum number of gates and direction changes on the hill. You hear that and read about it all the time.

Greg Needell used to mention it in his blog almost every week, in season. He would mention who was setting, and almost always point to the challenges of a specific hill.

If they had more length to work with, they could set with a different space, and frankly a different look. As SS suggests, more down the fall line. It would make things faster, but "cleaner" and probably less ugly. But the fact is that the sport is rooted in those classic locations.

And, yes, weather plays a big part in injuries, too. Both in terms of the visibility and the surface.

I think the general "chatter" has been that the 35M skis are better in terms of knees, and worse for backs. Obviously enough consensus for the change to be made.

Just my $.02.

Hope it's a positive change! Think it will be.

 

[jmeb]

To those who know a lot more about this than me (@Primoz , @Muleski and @ScotsSkier for starters) --

Is this question of equipment and relation to injuries (small radius = knee problems, big radius = back problems) seen as "solvable" by those in the know? As in, is there a belief that there is some optimal ski and course set that would make injuries relatively random from accidents vs the skiing itself? Or is some part of the human body (knees, back, etc) always going to be the weak link when people are pushing their skiing to the absolute limits, no matter the equipment setup?

 

[Swede]

Val d'Isere GS this weekend (not the BC replacement two weeks ago) actually was a hockey rink. It wasn't run in the same piste as the BC replacement two weeks ago that was a 'mild' course in La Daille. Commentary on Swedish broadcast actually went on about the unusually rock hard surface and as suggested, that it wasn't as common now. Very steep sections too.

 

[Muleski]

Is this question of equipment and relation to injuries (small radius = knee problems, big radius = back problems) seen as "solvable" by those in the know? As in, is there a belief that there is some optimal ski and course set that would make injuries relatively random from accidents vs the skiing itself? Or is some part of the human body (knees, back, etc) always going to be the weak link when people are pushing their skiing to the absolute limits, no matter the equipment setup?

Good question. I would say No. Never heard of one. The ski thing probably has some data behind it, by now. But I think it's correcting the move to the 195cm 35M to try to see if they can cut down in the general wear and tear on the guys, which seems to manifest itself as back problems and pain. No so much an injury linked to a crash, more chronic stuff that just persists. The knee problems were crashes, accidents, wrecks.

Safety is a concern to some degree, keeping in line with the sport. Good example are the concussion concerns and new helmet regs. They will not eliminate them, but they will help. There was a big spike in blown ACL's
with the smaller radius skis, and the issue was losing so many guys {and women},for the season. Bad for a lot of reasons. So they "fixed" it.

Fact is that it's a sport with risks and injuries. A lot of speed, a tough environment, weather issues, a lot of forces on the body, and not a lot of protection around you. It has always been that way, and there is a lot of appeal to it. I have been around the sport for a long time, and know friends who have suffered some awful injuries. I don't think any would change a thing. I was at a benefit a few years ago with a bunch of former WC DHers and they were joking over drinks about a bunch of horrible crashes. Consensus was that Todd Brooker at Kitz was the wildest to watch.

So, I don't think there's a plan to optimize the mix of performance and health/safety. I think that when some development in the sport looks like it might need a harder look, that will happen. Like the back issues.

For example, if after this ski change, the chronic stuff persists, maybe there will be some discussion about the courses, some parameters around injection, etc. Would be hard to do, IMO.

What I hear on the skis is that the consensus is that they had the right idea, but went too far. Particularly when combined with how the courses are set and races run. So tweak back the other way. Not forgetting that it is costly for every ski company to change gears......

The women's skis work well. They ski really well. But we still seem to see a lot of knee issues. So it's comfusing to me at times.

 

[razie]

What's been causing all the back issues? Do they know?

yeah:

while with men it's just brutal power and super extreme angulations.

with those skis, many need brute force to carve them into a much shorter radius... and angulation goes straight in the lower back.

 

[Cheizz]

Maybe I've missed this... Only the Men's GS skis will change? All the other FIS (Worldcup) gear specs remain the same as they are right now. Not that I'm a racer myself. Just want to be up to date

 

[hbear]

Yup, just the men's. women's stay the same.