Why Cant Your Ski Boots

[Noodler]

My mother told me that I should never say I cant.

 

[Mike King]

in raw simple terms

cuff adjustment lines the shaft of the boot up to the shape of the leg
base board/zeppa adjustments alter the relationship between the foot and the ankle inside the boot
external boot canting alters the relationship between the boot (inc foot and ankle) the ground and the knee/hip

there is a lot more to it than this but that is why you see a specialist and don't do this at home

I'm not asking as a consumer, but as a ski instructor. Might someone qualified go into the specifics of the difference between internal to the boot versus sole canting? And I don't mean cuff alignment.

@bud heishman?

 

[cem]

I'm not asking as a consumer, but as a ski instructor. Might someone qualified go into the specifics of the difference between internal to the boot versus sole canting? And I don't mean cuff alignment.

@bud heishman?

I should treat your response with the contempt that it deserves, as you suggest i am not qualified to comment, you didn't ask for specifics, but if you want them i can supply......

based on your location i can understand fully why you are so interested in internal boot canting (it seems very popular in that one resort

internal boot canting as stated in the headline alters the relationship between the foot and the ankle, it has a similar effect to a posted orthoses, in fact it could almost be seen as interchangeable with a few caveats.
Starting from the foot and working out, we need an orthoses which both gives full contact with the planar surface of the foot and gives stability and support whilst respecting the flexibility of the foot, the aim is always to have the foot in a balanced and stable position, this orthoses should then be interfaced to the zeppa of the boot (not all are flat in terms of both a flat surface and flat medial to lateral inside the boot).... after this point the internal balance system that you are most likely referring to comes in to play

we have the balancer for this in my store, i have an examiner who owns the machine but works with us and a few clients using this.... over the years he has often been questioned about why he only ever uses smaller angles, (0.5-1.5 degrees normally) where as other places use bigger angles.... the reason is simple, we set the orthoses up correctly in the first place, get this phase right and you don't need or want very much more correction inside the boot. The reason many places were using big angles inside the boot as they were either not using any form of orthoses or what they were using is deficient in its support characteristics

so what does this "correction" do? it inverts the whole foot and blocks some or all pronation, when you restrict motion in one plane of movement the body will use a different plane, surely the best way is to stabilise the foot respecting its flexibility as if we "block" movement we limit the movement patterns required to ski.... tipping the foot over like this will have some effect on knee position but only after you have take out all the joint flexibility (back to blocking).... the biggest issues with this occur when the orthoses is not functioning well, if the subtalar joint is allowed to pronate and you then add a shim to invert the foot you are essentially elevating the first ray, when you do this you unlock the mid tarsal joint and create an unstable bag of bones. So depending on a large number of parameters and " the monkey holding the wrench" internal boot "Canting" may or may not have the desired effect.... as yet nobody has defined what they want to achieve are you wanting to feel evenly from medial to lateral side and be able to apply pressure to either side of the foot in a balanced manner? in which case it CAN help, are you wanting to change knee position to create parallel shins on a flat ski? in which case its merits are limited


external canting... this in my view is true canting, you are by wedging or milling the sole of the boot or under the binding of the ski changing the position of the boot and its contents (foot and ankle) relative to the ground/ knee / hip
first aim, get the ski flat on the snow, then get the stance so the shins are parallel whist the ski is flat on the snow... some people are knock kneed, some bow legged some people are "uncantable" when i say that i mean that you might be able to achieve the first bit... (a ski flat on the snow), but due to joint space availability it may not be possible to get the parallel shins every time.... sometimes with canting you are actually canting (or correcting) and sometimes you are filling gaps to allow that flat stance.



all of this aside, if the skier is not in the correct size shape and volume of boot with a well made orthoses as a foundation it is pretty much pointless considering any of the above, equally i would urge people to actually get fore aft balance sorted first, the whole thing is a package and if one part of the system isn't working then nothing is working.... from 30+ year experience in fitting boots and analysing skiers i can say that the vast majority of skiers if in the correct boot /orthoses with appropriate cuff shape need minimal canting..... but like everything there are some who need lots and some who need none



if there is something more specific you want then shout up

Colin Martin C.Ped

 

[Mike King]

I should treat your response with the contempt that it deserves, as you suggest i am not qualified to comment, you didn't ask for specifics, but if you want them i can supply......

based on your location i can understand fully why you are so interested in internal boot canting (it seems very popular in that one resort

internal boot canting as stated in the headline alters the relationship between the foot and the ankle, it has a similar effect to a posted orthoses, in fact it could almost be seen as interchangeable with a few caveats.
Starting from the foot and working out, we need an orthoses which both gives full contact with the planar surface of the foot and gives stability and support whilst respecting the flexibility of the foot, the aim is always to have the foot in a balanced and stable position, this orthoses should then be interfaced to the zeppa of the boot (not all are flat in terms of both a flat surface and flat medial to lateral inside the boot).... after this point the internal balance system that you are most likely referring to comes in to play

we have the balancer for this in my store, i have an examiner who owns the machine but works with us and a few clients using this.... over the years he has often been questioned about why he only ever uses smaller angles, (0.5-1.5 degrees normally) where as other places use bigger angles.... the reason is simple, we set the orthoses up correctly in the first place, get this phase right and you don't need or want very much more correction inside the boot. The reason many places were using big angles inside the boot as they were either not using any form of orthoses or what they were using is deficient in its support characteristics

so what does this "correction" do? it inverts the whole foot and blocks some or all pronation, when you restrict motion in one plane of movement the body will use a different plane, surely the best way is to stabilise the foot respecting its flexibility as if we "block" movement we limit the movement patterns required to ski.... tipping the foot over like this will have some effect on knee position but only after you have take out all the joint flexibility (back to blocking).... the biggest issues with this occur when the orthoses is not functioning well, if the subtalar joint is allowed to pronate and you then add a shim to invert the foot you are essentially elevating the first ray, when you do this you unlock the mid tarsal joint and create an unstable bag of bones. So depending on a large number of parameters and " the monkey holding the wrench" internal boot "Canting" may or may not have the desired effect.... as yet nobody has defined what they want to achieve are you wanting to feel evenly from medial to lateral side and be able to apply pressure to either side of the foot in a balanced manner? in which case it CAN help, are you wanting to change knee position to create parallel shins on a flat ski? in which case its merits are limited


external canting... this in my view is true canting, you are by wedging or milling the sole of the boot or under the binding of the ski changing the position of the boot and its contents (foot and ankle) relative to the ground/ knee / hip
first aim, get the ski flat on the snow, then get the stance so the shins are parallel whist the ski is flat on the snow... some people are knock kneed, some bow legged some people are "uncantable" when i say that i mean that you might be able to achieve the first bit... (a ski flat on the snow), but due to joint space availability it may not be possible to get the parallel shins every time.... sometimes with canting you are actually canting (or correcting) and sometimes you are filling gaps to allow that flat stance.



all of this aside, if the skier is not in the correct size shape and volume of boot with a well made orthoses as a foundation it is pretty much pointless considering any of the above, equally i would urge people to actually get fore aft balance sorted first, the whole thing is a package and if one part of the system isn't working then nothing is working.... from 30+ year experience in fitting boots and analysing skiers i can say that the vast majority of skiers if in the correct boot /orthoses with appropriate cuff shape need minimal canting..... but like everything there are some who need lots and some who need none



if there is something more specific you want then shout up

Colin Martin C.Ped

Thanks for that @cem. I certainly did not equate you to be unqualified to answer the question, but want to understand the issues of internal versus external canting from professionals who have been trained in pedothotics and have practiced boot alignment sufficiently to recognized as experts. In most ski shops in Colorado, and elsewhere I presume, it appears that boot fitting services consist of upselling off the shelf footbeds or, less commonly, constructing an orthotic. There are much fewer folk who cant a boot, and often those folk do not seem to have much training in kinesiology, physiology, or anatomy. It has been my experience that amongst the folk recognized as experts, there's a bit of "black art" associated with the practice where you, as a consumer or even a ski professional find dueling approaches to alignment, even amongst the adherents of external canting let alone throwing in the internal folk.

And yes, my location does select part of the issue. In Aspen we have a guy who is building a business as a boot fitter on building internal orthotics that are canted. He has recently moved from selling shims to creating 3d printed orthotics with the cant built in. Some of my friends and colleagues have had good success with his stuff. My training partner, and I, have not.

In my case, before becoming a ski instructor, I had the experience of going through boots that were set up by the adherent of internal canting and by two adherents of external canting, one of them by @bud heishman. The internal stuff never worked for me, probably because of the amount of cant that I require (at that time 4.5 degrees on one foot and 3.5 degrees on the other) made the boot very uncomfortable to wear. The boots that were setup by Bud and Lou worked well, but it was work that was done on a boot that was brought to them rather than working with them to select a boot that fit my anatomy -- and these boot fitters were not anywhere local to me; the work was done at a ski camp.

Amongst many of my colleagues, we believe that poorly fitting boots that are inappropriately aligned to the anatomy of our students is one of the major reasons that newcomers to our sport are not converted to life long skiers, and it is also one of the major reasons that many only dabble in the sport. So when I see a client with a clear boot problem, who do I send them to? The internal or external canting folk?

There's no love lost between these folk. And there's a philosophical war amongst their adherents. So my question was really directed toward trying to understand where there's commonality between them and where there are differences. And which approach is likely to be more generalizable.

Currently, I'm strongly in the external cant camp. That's based in part on the experience of the boot fitter I use who is one of the most respected boot fitters in the US. But there are people I trust who find the other approach more compelling. I'd just like to understand what the real differences are.

Mike

 

[Philpug]

I my talks with MasterFit i have been begging them to create a module for instructors, not so much for them to do work on boots what what to look for in students that are having limitations in their movement. The module could be tied into their PSIA training and go towards their certifications.

 

[Noodler]

Currently, I'm strongly in the external cant camp. That's based in part on the experience of the boot fitter I use who is one of the most respected boot fitters in the US. But there are people I trust who find the other approach more compelling. I'd just like to understand what the real differences are.

Mike

Safe to assume that you're referring to Jim Lindsay at BOOTech? He's done work for me too over the years.

 

[Mike King]

Phil, in PSIA-RM, we do have a clinic on boot fitting. It is delivered by Jim Lindsey.

 

[Mike King]

Safe to assume that you're referring to Jim Lindsay at BOOTech? He's done work for me too over the years.

Yep.

 

[Noodler]

I should treat your response with the contempt that it deserves, as you suggest i am not qualified to comment, you didn't ask for specifics, but if you want them i can supply......

based on your location i can understand fully why you are so interested in internal boot canting (it seems very popular in that one resort

internal boot canting as stated in the headline alters the relationship between the foot and the ankle, it has a similar effect to a posted orthoses, in fact it could almost be seen as interchangeable with a few caveats.
Starting from the foot and working out, we need an orthoses which both gives full contact with the planar surface of the foot and gives stability and support whilst respecting the flexibility of the foot, the aim is always to have the foot in a balanced and stable position, this orthoses should then be interfaced to the zeppa of the boot (not all are flat in terms of both a flat surface and flat medial to lateral inside the boot).... after this point the internal balance system that you are most likely referring to comes in to play

we have the balancer for this in my store, i have an examiner who owns the machine but works with us and a few clients using this.... over the years he has often been questioned about why he only ever uses smaller angles, (0.5-1.5 degrees normally) where as other places use bigger angles.... the reason is simple, we set the orthoses up correctly in the first place, get this phase right and you don't need or want very much more correction inside the boot. The reason many places were using big angles inside the boot as they were either not using any form of orthoses or what they were using is deficient in its support characteristics

so what does this "correction" do? it inverts the whole foot and blocks some or all pronation, when you restrict motion in one plane of movement the body will use a different plane, surely the best way is to stabilise the foot respecting its flexibility as if we "block" movement we limit the movement patterns required to ski.... tipping the foot over like this will have some effect on knee position but only after you have take out all the joint flexibility (back to blocking).... the biggest issues with this occur when the orthoses is not functioning well, if the subtalar joint is allowed to pronate and you then add a shim to invert the foot you are essentially elevating the first ray, when you do this you unlock the mid tarsal joint and create an unstable bag of bones. So depending on a large number of parameters and " the monkey holding the wrench" internal boot "Canting" may or may not have the desired effect.... as yet nobody has defined what they want to achieve are you wanting to feel evenly from medial to lateral side and be able to apply pressure to either side of the foot in a balanced manner? in which case it CAN help, are you wanting to change knee position to create parallel shins on a flat ski? in which case its merits are limited


external canting... this in my view is true canting, you are by wedging or milling the sole of the boot or under the binding of the ski changing the position of the boot and its contents (foot and ankle) relative to the ground/ knee / hip
first aim, get the ski flat on the snow, then get the stance so the shins are parallel whist the ski is flat on the snow... some people are knock kneed, some bow legged some people are "uncantable" when i say that i mean that you might be able to achieve the first bit... (a ski flat on the snow), but due to joint space availability it may not be possible to get the parallel shins every time.... sometimes with canting you are actually canting (or correcting) and sometimes you are filling gaps to allow that flat stance.



all of this aside, if the skier is not in the correct size shape and volume of boot with a well made orthoses as a foundation it is pretty much pointless considering any of the above, equally i would urge people to actually get fore aft balance sorted first, the whole thing is a package and if one part of the system isn't working then nothing is working.... from 30+ year experience in fitting boots and analysing skiers i can say that the vast majority of skiers if in the correct boot /orthoses with appropriate cuff shape need minimal canting..... but like everything there are some who need lots and some who need none



if there is something more specific you want then shout up

Colin Martin C.Ped

This is excellent Colin. Thanks for taking the time to capture these thoughts for the forum.

After digesting what you've wrote, it reinforces my long held belief that many boot fitters (and unfortunately their skier clientele) are getting this backwards. You seem to be making it clear that boot stance alignment should be addressed first... then the "boot fit" be modified to make the boot comfortable and pain free. I say this because so many of the boot elements that must be modified to get the stance alignment correct are inextricably linked to the final boot fit and the comfort the skier will have in it. Since the alignment will modify the boot fit, it's important that it be addressed first, as any boot "fitting" done before alignment will be possibly invalidated by the later alignment work.

Unfortunately most skiers are getting their boots to "fit" first, without pain, and then the stance alignment is handled afterward, if at all. I'm with @Mike King in that the boot alignment directly impacts a skier's progress in this sport, and thus their "fun factor". There's insufficient awareness of the criticality of this part of the sport and unfortunately this favors those skiers who are already "anatomically correct" to take advantage of whatever boot they may have purchased from the chain store or online.

For me, as a very dedicated hobbyist in this sport, I want more of the underlying methodology exposed, explained, and better understood by the skiing community. Putting this information in the "light" will only serve to improve the process and gain understanding for everyone involved in the sport.

 

[Uncle-A]

I my talks with MasterFit i have been begging them to create a module for instructors, not so much for them to do work on boots what what to look for in students that are having limitations in their movement. The module could be tied into their PSIA training and go towards their certifications.

How many PSIA people sell boots? Are the PSIA Levels not challenging enough that additional criteria needs to be added? Just wondering what the upside would be.

 

[Philpug]

How many PSIA people sell boots? Are the PSIA Levels not challenging enough that additional criteria needs to be added? Just wondering what the upside would be.

I am not talking fitting boots but a module that gave them what to look for in students that are out of alignment.

 

[pliny the elder]

I should treat your response with the contempt that it deserves, as you suggest i am not qualified to comment, you didn't ask for specifics, but if you want them i can supply......

based on your location i can understand fully why you are so interested in internal boot canting (it seems very popular in that one resort

internal boot canting as stated in the headline alters the relationship between the foot and the ankle, it has a similar effect to a posted orthoses, in fact it could almost be seen as interchangeable with a few caveats.
Starting from the foot and working out, we need an orthoses which both gives full contact with the planar surface of the foot and gives stability and support whilst respecting the flexibility of the foot, the aim is always to have the foot in a balanced and stable position, this orthoses should then be interfaced to the zeppa of the boot (not all are flat in terms of both a flat surface and flat medial to lateral inside the boot).... after this point the internal balance system that you are most likely referring to comes in to play

we have the balancer for this in my store, i have an examiner who owns the machine but works with us and a few clients using this.... over the years he has often been questioned about why he only ever uses smaller angles, (0.5-1.5 degrees normally) where as other places use bigger angles.... the reason is simple, we set the orthoses up correctly in the first place, get this phase right and you don't need or want very much more correction inside the boot. The reason many places were using big angles inside the boot as they were either not using any form of orthoses or what they were using is deficient in its support characteristics

so what does this "correction" do? it inverts the whole foot and blocks some or all pronation, when you restrict motion in one plane of movement the body will use a different plane, surely the best way is to stabilise the foot respecting its flexibility as if we "block" movement we limit the movement patterns required to ski.... tipping the foot over like this will have some effect on knee position but only after you have take out all the joint flexibility (back to blocking).... the biggest issues with this occur when the orthoses is not functioning well, if the subtalar joint is allowed to pronate and you then add a shim to invert the foot you are essentially elevating the first ray, when you do this you unlock the mid tarsal joint and create an unstable bag of bones. So depending on a large number of parameters and " the monkey holding the wrench" internal boot "Canting" may or may not have the desired effect.... as yet nobody has defined what they want to achieve are you wanting to feel evenly from medial to lateral side and be able to apply pressure to either side of the foot in a balanced manner? in which case it CAN help, are you wanting to change knee position to create parallel shins on a flat ski? in which case its merits are limited


external canting... this in my view is true canting, you are by wedging or milling the sole of the boot or under the binding of the ski changing the position of the boot and its contents (foot and ankle) relative to the ground/ knee / hip
first aim, get the ski flat on the snow, then get the stance so the shins are parallel whist the ski is flat on the snow... some people are knock kneed, some bow legged some people are "uncantable" when i say that i mean that you might be able to achieve the first bit... (a ski flat on the snow), but due to joint space availability it may not be possible to get the parallel shins every time.... sometimes with canting you are actually canting (or correcting) and sometimes you are filling gaps to allow that flat stance.



all of this aside, if the skier is not in the correct size shape and volume of boot with a well made orthoses as a foundation it is pretty much pointless considering any of the above, equally i would urge people to actually get fore aft balance sorted first, the whole thing is a package and if one part of the system isn't working then nothing is working.... from 30+ year experience in fitting boots and analysing skiers i can say that the vast majority of skiers if in the correct boot /orthoses with appropriate cuff shape need minimal canting..... but like everything there are some who need lots and some who need none



if there is something more specific you want then shout up

Colin Martin C.Ped

In case you missed it, here are the answers to "inside the boot vs. outside the boot". I was going to respond to the question but Colin has covered all the bases.

It couldn't have been more accurate or succinct.

Each aspect of the equation is separate and should be dealt with as such.

The orthotic has one role, establish a stable stance, not to far to one side or the other, good bone stacking and allowing for range of motion.

Cuff alignment to match leg angle so that the neutral stance is flat.

Fore/aft balance. Fore/aft balance. Fore/aft balance.

Canting when needed is usually in small amounts and has been apparent from early on in the process.

The more accurately you do small amounts of small things, the less likely the need to do big amounts of big things.

If you try to do too much with one aspect, you compromise all the others.

And if your process always yields the same result, you might want to question the process, not the result.

pliny the elder

 

[Calbearski]

Is there any effective difference between canting the boot by adding a cant to the boot sole similar to what Cantology offers versus adding cant strips under the bindings, other than the convenience of not having to cant every binding with strips vs. canting the boot sole? Wondering if the slight difference in height affects relationship between the leg and the ski.

 

[Noodler]

Is there any effective difference between canting the boot by adding a cant to the boot sole similar to what Cantology offers versus adding cant strips under the bindings, other than the convenience of not having to cant every binding with strips vs. canting the boot sole? Wondering if the slight difference in height affects relationship between the leg and the ski.

I do not believe there is any effective difference between these 2 approaches. All the literature I have on the topic references being able to swap between these two methods without any adjustment to the measurements taken. Some boots simply cannot be canted on the soles (although this is becoming a rarer situation) and the under binding cant strips are the only option.

 

[Spooky]

Or if you don’t want to fly with your skis. But under binding cants are all ya got if your current boots cannot be canted and you don’t want to buy new yet, or you use tech bindings. The later is a biggy.

Reviving this again: great info in this thread.

I got boots canted using Cantology wedges and I'm glad I finally did it. Are you all still make binding wedges? I want to do my tech setup that sees firmer snow as my left leg feels weird now without the canting. Shop bros seemed like this doesn't even exist.

 

[Philpug]

Reviving this again: great info in this thread.

I got boots canted using Cantology wedges and I'm glad I finally did it. Are you all still make binding wedges? I want to do my tech setup that sees firmer snow as my left leg feels weird now without the canting. Shop bros seemed like this doesn't even exist.

They do, Let me know what you need.

 

[coupdevill]

A little over a year ago I started this thread, and I’m quite happy with how it has turned out, I am actually going to and chime in on many of the comments, I have been canting skiers in one form or another probably since about 1978 or 79 I won’t say I’ve done thousands, but I’ve done many many hundreds of cant assessments and corrections. My partner Will and I came up with this concept a little more than 10 years ago (concept being intra-sole cants or putting the wedge between the outside of the boot and the boot shell), it has led us into a bunch of different directions and more recently to expand our knowledge of stance alignment and the different approaches used, get ready for a whole bunch more, sure to inspire conversation and hopefully a new appreciation of your local boot fitter.

 

[bud heishman]

Great post here by Colin and happy to see the growing interest from instructors and coaches on this topic. I too have advocated with PSIA to include a more comprehensive understanding of alignment in the educational and exam process. Unfortunately it has been a very slow process. Once I came to realize, many years ago, how small changes in the angles in my boots made a very noticeable improvement in performance and that the improvement was instantaneous, I have been on a mission to highlight the importance in improving skiing performance. I am currently working with a manufacturer to offer on hill and classroom training for boot fitters and instructor/coaches interested in learning more about identifying and differentiating alignment impediments from impediments originating in technique, physiological and psychological areas. I believe there is sufficient interest out there to support this type of camp/clinic. I also have an on snow night school course in planning stages for Tahoe region coaches/instructors (level II and above) covering this topic.

 

[markojp]

Thanks Coup and Bud! There is most certainly interest (and need) in the instruction community for this information. We did two successful virtual clinics on the topic of gear choices, alignment, and outcomes as part of our annual PSIA NW fall conference. In fact, we even used some of Coup's video (with his blessing) as part of the presentation. Our ski school has also partnered with a local shop to help our instructors access needed boot fit and alignment work at a nicely discounted rate. We're especially fortunate to have a small, but critical number of training staff with both the ability and experience to evaluate and diagnose equipment issues on the hill. Coup, thanks for putting this on the broader radar!

 

[Philpug]

I mentioned this is another thread, I will check EVERYONE I get on a boot bench for canting, to me it is part of the bootfitting process and IMHO NOT to do would be a diservice. As soon as I see someone is in or out X* I will mention "I bet your right turn is stronger than you left" or "I Imagine you are having trouble doing ... this". They would look back in astonishment as if I had a windew into their soul and ask "How did you know???". I then would ask them if they wanted me to fix it? Usually it is a yes.

I would say about 50% of the people I see need canting of those 80% have it done. Sometimes I get asked, if it they should ski the boot first, I have to explain it's not like a liner packing out, this is do or do not modification and it has as more to do with performance of the boot and skiing experience than fit.

One thing that can get hidden as canting is leg length discrepancies and if someone of off 2* degrees specifically on just one leg, I then take a step back and start asking more questions first one "Have you ever been diagnosed with a leg length discrepancy" then other follow up ones. Rule of thumb here is that you do one half of what the discrepancy is, so if they have s 6mm LLD, you add 3mm to the short leg. This is where I have two issues with product and that is manufacters for some reason insist on hollowing out the boot lugs of boots that have preplacable soles, maybe to save weight but it limits the ability to do some work. And second with Cantology, why do you sell LLD shims in pairs, and not singles? While your products are no doubt one of the best on the market, they are not inexpensive, why make us but something I will might not need? Shims are X price for a pair, one shim does not have to be exactily half price, add 20-30% to one. (Just a little pet peeve).