Type II vs. Type III skiers?

[ski diva]

I've always been told that the difference between Type II and Type III skiers isn't necessarily ability, but rather aggression. Someone who races and is really hard driving would be a Type III because they really, really don't want their bindings popping off (then again, who does?), and someone who isn't quite that aggressive would be Type II.

I'm always slightly confused when I go to get my bindings worked on. Usually, I just fill in II because even though I'm an advanced skier, I'm definitely not a racer. PLUS I'm not that big, which I think factors into it, too.

Thoughts?

 

[Jilly]

DIN setting include all that you mention SD plus ah....age and BSL.

I say the same thing too. Type III to me is a racer, not me!

 

[Sheena]

I also assume that Type III would include those in more extreme terrain where you don't want to pre-release. I think that type II can include advanced skiiers, but Type III are advanced/expert skiiers who are skiing the super steep, extreme terrain.

 

[ski diva]

DIN setting include all that you mention SD plus ah....age and BSL.

You'd HAVE to bring up age. :sigh:

 

[sibhusky]

I think of it as a "bell curve". Most people are Type II. Those who are Type I or III are the outlyers for one reason or another.

 

[volklgirl]

The official stance is:
Type I = those who ski cautiously or at slower speeds, or who want lower than average release settings.
Type III = those who ski agressively or at higher speeds, or who want higher than average release settings.

Type II = everyone else.

Even though I race, I classify myself as a II on everything except my race skis....I want my skis to come off when needed!

Classifying your type has nothing to do with size or age, although type, size and age all play a role in setting binding DIN.

 

[2ski2moro]

When I was having binding release problems last year, they told me that if I was over 50, they have to reduce my DIN by 1. I think I will be perpetually 49 and Type II.

 

[altagirl]

When I was having binding release problems last year, they told me that if I was over 50, they have to reduce my DIN by 1. I think I will be perpetually 49 and Type II.

...Or you could go with your real age and say you are now a type III. Which I think is the point too - they ARE factoring your age and weight into this decision, so if you feel that you are skiing stronger than the average 50+ woman of your size, or that you would be perpetually losing skis if you bumped the DIN down so you want it higher - then you SHOULD be a type III, no?

I've had mine on type III settings for years, but they always seem to release just fine when I need them to. Though - I don't think I had a single crash last season so maybe that's getting hard to say. But then again, I also mostly tele'd last year and those bindings are just plain non-releaseable anyway.

 

[mountainxtc]

The official stance is:
Type I = those who ski cautiously or at slower speeds, or who want lower than average release settings.
Type III = those who ski agressively or at higher speeds, or who want higher than average release settings.

Type II = everyone else.

Correct. There are also a few lesser used sub-types, the main one being III+, which you know about if you need it.

The above descriptions are the only thing you should consider when deciding on a type.

The DIN system is based on a combination of skier type, height, weight (actually height OR weight, but you need to give both), age, boot sole length and binding manufacturer. Because these things are already factored into the calculation, you mess up the system if you try to second guess it (i.e. "I'm type II and I'm 50 but I know they'll reduce my DIN for that so I'll say I'm 49". Tell the truth. If you find your bindings are releasing too easily, you are a type III).

The DIN calculation works extremely well, if you let it!!

 

[Pequenita]

If you find your bindings are releasing too easily, you are a type III).

Or, your boot sole(s) could be worn.

My left ski kept pre-releasing at really inconvenient times a few years ago. Like when flying down groomers. Just to keep me and my right leg on our toes, so to speak.

I do wonder, though, what is the rationale behind using age 50 as the benchmark? Does something magical happen at that age that I just have to wait for?

 

[mountainxtc]

Or, your boot sole(s) could be worn.

For sure. Mechanical issues could always be at fault in a pre-release. But a binding tech should always catch that. If somebody brought a pari of skis to me for adjusting from type II up to III settings I would always check the boot and binding for such issues first, and so should any certified tech.

I do wonder, though, what is the rationale behind using age 50 as the benchmark? Does something magical happen at that age that I just have to wait for?

Of course everybody is different but it comes down to, well, they had to pick a number!! Obviously they looked at incident statistics when making that decision....

 

[Jilly]

Does something magical happen at that age that I just have to wait for?

If there was - I missed it!

 

[dloveski]

....using age 50 as the benchmark? Does something magical happen at that age that I just have to wait for?

Yes, something magical, very special. You'll just have to wait and see

 

[nopoleskier]

...Or you could go with your real age and say you are now a type III. Which I think is the point too - they ARE factoring your age and weight into this decision, so if you feel that you are skiing stronger than the average 50+ woman of your size, or that you would be perpetually losing skis if you bumped the DIN down so you want it higher - then you SHOULD be a type III, no?

I've had mine on type III settings for years, but they always seem to release just fine when I need them to. Though - I don't think I had a single crash last season so maybe that's getting hard to say. But then again, I also mostly tele'd last year and those bindings are just plain non-releaseable anyway.

hmm. I think it's combo, mostly agressive powerful skiing, weight, strength, ability, & terrain all play into type 3 vs 2. I'm very physical skier, but most important skis some off when need too. as for 50 being a bench mark I'm never growing up so that's not in the equation, (even if it is magical lol)

 

[ski now work later]

Because I'm already 50 (turning 51 on Sunday), by the time I am a full-fledged "advanced" skier, I will be far beyond the kind of DIN settings that go with type III, so I think age is significant along with skiing style. I've been a 5.5 DIN setting for several seasons and it's been perfect. I had to lie last year to keep that setting and not go down to (I think) 4.5, so I'm a type III on paper but a type II on the mountain. The whole age 25-49 and 50+ DIN rating is kind of sobering!

Now . . . if I skied a lot of steeps and deep powder, even if I weren't a hard charger, I might want to bump up the DIN to avoid a lost ski which can be dangerous and a PITA.

 

[evaino]

I am a type III skier - I think partly because I ski bumps. I answer the questions, but then I'll do my own DIN adjustments after a few times out, or I ask them to when I get a tune if I've noticed that I pop out too easily or I don't pop when I think I should have. I keep them high - 8 I think, although I think I might have dropped to 7 last year. That works great for me, although even at that, I've been skiing bumps in the trees (Windigo at Tremblant, so not steep) and skied an extra turn before wiping out because I left a ski behind. But when it comes to big spills, so far they pop when I want them to. it is a fine balance, because you can have a nasty fall if your skis pop off too easily too.

All that to say, I think the guideline is good, but we are all individuals, so some tweaking may be needed.

Elsbeth

 

[KatyPerrey]

I have always said Type III skier for my settings if asked. With all my stats it brings me to a DIN of 8. When using the link/chart below I was an 8 but when I changed my age to 50+ the din dropped to 6.5!!! (Type II - I was a 6.5 and 50+ 5.5.) With this kind of setting I might really hurt myself. Good thing I have a few more years before I turn 50 and I think I will stick to a TYPE III skier!!!:p

https://www.dinsetting.com/

 

[altagirl]

hmm. I think it's combo, mostly agressive powerful skiing, weight, strength, ability, & terrain all play into type 3 vs 2. I'm very physical skier, but most important skis some off when need too. as for 50 being a bench mark I'm never growing up so that's not in the equation, (even if it is magical lol)

I agree - except that you shouldn't factor weight into which type of skier you are. That already gets calculated into the DIN setting. Meaning a 100lb type III skier is already getting a different DIN setting than a 160lb type III skier, so it's already accounted for. If you take that into consideration while determining which type of skier you are, it's getting factored in twice and throwing things off.

 

[MaineSkiLady]

A continuing conundrum - and I know we've had the din setting discussion in the past, especially with regard to "the magic age." Taking it at absolute face value, and based on my weight last winter (I have gained 10#), my age, and being II, my DIN would have been 3.5. Since the minimum setting on my bindings is 3, and conventional wisdom says that the bindings function best when more in the mid-range of the lower and upper.....what to do?? Get a junior binding (which would never work with this BSL)? Pretty sure I could walk out of a 3.5. Now, being 10+#, it's "all the way" up to 4.5 on the chart. That's what DH should be at, maybe 5.0. Yet, on the occasions when we have switched skis (same BSL), I have seen him walk out of my 5.5. So I'm at 5.5 and he is at 7, and neither of us has ever had a problem with not releasing when we need to (which is thankfully seldom).

Factored into this equation is that I have been skiing double the days and generally tougher terrain and conditions since I've lived here, all of which has happened since "the magic age." So there are some intangibles which have to be carefully considered.

 

[evaino]

A continuing conundrum - and I know we've had the din setting discussion in the past, especially with regard to "the magic age." Taking it at absolute face value, and based on my weight last winter (I have gained 10#), my age, and being II, my DIN would have been 3.5. Since the minimum setting on my bindings is 3, and conventional wisdom says that the bindings function best when more in the mid-range of the lower and upper.....what to do?? Get a junior binding (which would never work with this BSL)? Pretty sure I could walk out of a 3.5. Now, being 10+#, it's "all the way" up to 4.5 on the chart. That's what DH should be at, maybe 5.0. Yet, on the occasions when we have switched skis (same BSL), I have seen him walk out of my 5.5. So I'm at 5.5 and he is at 7, and neither of us has ever had a problem with not releasing when we need to (which is thankfully seldom).

Factored into this equation is that I have been skiing double the days and generally tougher terrain and conditions since I've lived here, all of which has happened since "the magic age." So there are some intangibles which have to be carefully considered.

I think this is a key point - the equation is just a way to try to fit everyone into a scale, but there are always exceptions. I think if you are an exception, you should make an adjustment (or ask your ski shop to). Having a din setting that is too low is maybe not quite as dangerous as too high, but is still dangerous.

Elsbeth