Lighter or stronger?

HortonHorton Posts: 24,111 Administrator
edited December 2017 in Other Stuff
If you had to focus on one or the other... What is more important for slalom? Lighter or stronger?

Support BallOfSpray by supporting the companies that support BallOfSpray

Connelly / DBSkis /   Denali / Eden Ski Lake  / Goode / HO Syndicate / MasterCraft /

Masterline / O'Brien / Performance Ski and Surf /  Stokes / Reflex / Radar 




  • Posts: 149 Baller
    Both? I think everybody has an optimum strength to weight ratio. If I had to choose one or the other based on myself, to I would say strength hands down as I'm 150lbs soaking wet. Lighter would not give me anymore advantage.
  • AndreAndre Posts: 711 Crazy Baller
    Why not both ?
    Nate is light and is Terry.
    Whithney is 115 lbs and she doesn't bench 300 lbs but run deep 39 usually.
    Technique is more important than both i think...
  • thagerthager Posts: 3,875 Mega Baller
    Lighter is better. Perfect body stack overcomes stronger.
    Stir vigorously then leave!
  • braindamagebraindamage Posts: 68 Baller
    I’d say light first, which will maximize the strength you do have. Unless you lose weight in an unhealthy way and deplete lots of muscle in the process.
  • bigskieridahobigskieridaho Posts: 670 Crazy Baller
    I think being light really helps. I dropped 10 before last season and improved greatly. I could concentrate on technique and not try to muscle my turns as much. Although strength is important which seems to be built from start of the season to finish along with some cross training.
  • Bruce_ButterfieldBruce_Butterfield Posts: 1,097 Mega Baller
    @horton your question doesn't make sense unless you are trying to choose between scotch and Dogfishhead.

    Look at a couple of extreme examples - which body type do you think would be a better slalom skier: a 6', 250 lb bodybuilder or a 6', 140 lb marathon runner? (the answer is they would both suck)

    Its simple strength to weight ratio. Get your body fat percentage in the low single digits and get stronger.

    And yes, its much harder for the chronologically gifted folks to maintain, let alone improve the strength to weight ratio.
    If it was easy, they would call it wakeboarding.
  • ALPJrALPJr Posts: 1,412 Crazy Baller
    It may be the genius of the and... lighter and stronger.
  • GloersenGloersen Posts: 682 Crazy Baller
    edited December 2017
    Greater strength to weight ratio is the obvious answer.

    However, quickness, balance, and flexibility are extremely important attributes as well, but difficult to comparatively measure. These traits more often correlate with being relatively lighter, as well as being innate....(and younger)

    Increasing SWR is great, doing so in a manner emphasizing quickness, balance, flexibility, like the pro/elite skiers with the greatest longevity, is better.
    Friluftsliv - stå løpet ut!
  • lpskierlpskier Posts: 1,932 Mega Baller
    edited December 2017
    Lighter. Make dealing with ZO easier.
    John Wilkins- Si non pro sanguine quem ludus ne. #iskiconnelly
  • ShererSkierShererSkier Posts: 90 Baller
    I think it's a balance of both. At the end of 2016 I hurt my knee not skiing or lifting related. At the time of injury I weighed 185, benched 310, squatted 440, and dead lifted 465 all one rep maxes. since I could not squat or dead lift the entire off season and stopped benching heavy, I lost a lot of mass in those regions but not any weight. What I did is start a stretching program every day and gained a lot of flexibility and agility and started the 2017 season skiing better than I had all of 2016 right from the first pass. However, I did a lot of reading on technique in the off season and I believe that helped a lot, but I also felt it was easier to get into the proper position with my reduced mass and increased flexibility. This sport is so complex that I think it really is important to have a balance of all physical abilities.
  • WishWish Posts: 6,930 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    edited December 2017
    The REAL question is.. stronger or lighter?..ya got it backwards.

    Agree with @adamhcaldwell. I'm fatter but skiing better. Its all in my GUT. Go figure.
    >>> 11.25..a different kettle of fish. <<<
  • 6balls6balls Posts: 4,605 ★★★Triple Panda Award Recipient ★★★
    You don't have to be as strong if you are lighter...still need some base strength just not as much cuz power to weight ratio is important.

    Agree on those chiming in on technique trumping all...but the question was more power or less weight.

    I believe it's easier to have an effective power to weight ratio and be more agile at a lighter weight in general.
    Dave Ross--die cancer die
  • JC McCavitJC McCavit Posts: 440 Baller
    Boats or skiers?
    JC McCavit
  • ozskiozski Posts: 1,423
    edited December 2017
    The way that the sport is heading with more HP means skiers will have to be more technical and have the perfect balance of power to weight to be competitive at the highest levels in my opinion. I'm also a fan of "ride the biggest ski you can turn" which plays into the whole equation. To answer the question I'm going lighter which to some extent gives me the other.
    'Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better.'' Boat 2005 Nautique 196 6L ZO - Ski: KD Platinum

  • RazorRoss3RazorRoss3 Posts: 1,219 Mega Baller
    The 5lb difference between my 180 ski weight and 185lb lifting weight is huge. I can feel the extra 5 dragging me down on my ski, slowing me up and creating extra load. In the gym that same 5lbs is a huge power and endurance differential. Anything south of 180 and I lose endurance, strength, and energy fast.
  • bigskieridahobigskieridaho Posts: 670 Crazy Baller
    I’ve seen plenty of people with a gut or out of shape ski a course pretty well. I feel like half of it is a stereotype of how you are suppose to look or be as a skier. It is like drinking a beer after your done for the day and some people don’t or judge you because you do.
  • TustinTomTustinTom Posts: 81 Baller
    I think Enzo Ferrari said he would rather have his cars 10% lighter than 10% faster (adding the required weight to increase HP). The rationale being the wear and tear of accelerating and decelerating more mass during a race.

    @adamhcaldwell I spend way more time on this forum, watching videos, reading Fin Whisperer etc but still struggle at 15 off/32mph. Only skiing about 3x a month, I can't practice enough to conquer the technique needed or when on the course, don't want to practice because that time is so rare. I'm also handicapped with excessive weight. At 6'4" and a weak 240lbs, I think I'm "medically" 40lbs overweight.

    Please come up with a technique elixir that will get my butt up, arm's down and weight on my front foot. Perhaps a monthly prescription only available with the purchase of a 71' Denali ? I'm all in ! I'm already a fan of the Adam's.

    Videoing my golf swing or skiing is the same. What I "feel" I am doing and what I am "actually" doing are two different things. The difference is the ability to correct and perfect the technique is far greater/harder in skiing. The similarity is that is either the club or skis fault. LOL.
  • mwetskiermwetskier Posts: 1,241 Mega Baller
    two words: freddie winter

  • ScottScottScottScott Posts: 351 Solid Baller
    There's also a big difference between bulk/weight-lifting strength and fit/strong. Many skiers like Whitney and Will Asher do cross fit. They are extremely fit and strong athletes, and they ski pretty well.
  • OldboyIIOldboyII Posts: 440 Baller
    Getting lighter takes less time than getting stronger. And easier...
  • braindamagebraindamage Posts: 68 Baller
    I said lighter “first”, because if you are overweight and wondering which to focus on, weight loss will happen more quickly and be more impactful. Building strength as a part of losing weight would be good as well.
  • bishop8950bishop8950 Posts: 911 Open or 55K Rated Skier
    If you are really overweight, start there for so many reasons. Love Caldwell’s point on understanding and technique. So true and always my primary focus. Strength is great and a certain amount is a prerequisite, but after a certain point I don’t think it helps.
  • sunvalleylawsunvalleylaw Posts: 1,124 Crazy Baller
    Efficiency is more important than both. But being light and lean I think is an advantage to being efficient.
  • MillerTime38MillerTime38 Posts: 248 Solid Baller
    edited January 1
    I think the question just asks to IF you had to choose one, obviously they are both important.

    For me it is lighter, The less wear and tear on my body the better. Especially having to go old man speed now whatever I can do to try and put less load on the boat and my body the better.
  • skiboynyskiboyny Posts: 130 Baller
    @Bruce_Butterfield while I agree with your analogy, I have to say that most people(not genetically gifted) will not attain single digit body fat levels nor would it be healthy to do so. It would take a tremendous commitment to diet and exercise that quite frankly most people just wouldn't be willing to do. Low double digits is a bit more practical and attainable.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Not sure how to deal with a long link?