LETTERS
safety and reduce risk of injury” reads an Aug.
24, 2011 FIS press release. The studies ref-
erenced as “proof” were well conducted, the
conclusions are disputable but not unreason-
able and they are an important addition to the
scientific body of evidence. However, the sci-
ence as it exists now is not settled and the
studies the FIS used to draw their conclusions
certainly do not amount to proof.
I feel it is very probable that the unintended
consequences of the FIS decisions will cause
more injuries than will be prevented. I feel the
FIS should reconsider their actions and take
a slower, more careful approach to equip-
ment change that does not unnecessarily put
at risk the health and safety of thousands of
athletes.
The new skis might be safer, but I believe it
much more likely they will be more dangerous.
It cannot be proven one way or the other, but
the FIS decision forces thousands of athletes
to accept this unknown risk to their health and
safety in order to participate in their beloved
sport. The ski industry will spend tens of mil-
lions of dollars developing and producing the
new skis. If the FIS’s bet that the skis will be
safer is wrong, the liability is huge. Can the
FIS survive if the new equipment decisions
turn out to be wrong? The FIS cannot say they
were not warned.
I believe that increasing the length and in-
creasing the sidecut radius for competition GS
skis from the current 185 centimeter minimum
length and 27 meter minimum sidecut radius
to 195 cm minimum length and 35 m minimum
sidecut radius will have the following effects:
• Non-linear control response — unstable leg
geometry.
Non-linear control response
The Salzburg study shows that loads on the
skier are reduced on longer, larger sidecut
skis compared to the current 185 cm, 27 m
sidecut skis. Their tests assume the load re-
duction is due to the ski differences, but I be-
lieve it is more likely due to the fact that the
comparison was made between a ski that was
very familiar to the testers and several that
were unfamiliar. I argue that the testers would
have generated lower loads on any ski they
were not familiar with and the ski design differ-
ences did not play a significant roll in reducing
the measured loads. Athletes will find ways to
use 100 percent of their strength no matter the
equipment. This is what athletes do.
The geometric relationship between sidecut
radius, edge angle and turning radius is well
known to all ski designers. The theory shows
that a 35 m ski will have the same turning ra-
dius as a 27 m ski if the ski is tipped on edge
approximately 7 degrees more in a typical
World Cup GS turn. The edge angle must be
increased relative to the skier’s center of mass
(COM). In other words, to ski the same line at
the same speed the skier’s COM must be in
the same place, but the ski must be edged 7
degrees more. Thus, more knee angulation.
Athletes will discover that more knee angula-
tion will allow them to ski the same line at the
same speed as they are accustomed to skiing
