Task for exam. Video

Here's a video of some short radius turns.

If you just want to do an MA, Go ahead and have fun. Think of it as a practice MA.

Specificly, however, I would like to hear from examiners or trainers.

How would you score these turns? (1-7)

Would they pass Level II?
How about Level III?

Please put your "score" with comments of how and why you came up with the score.

Reminder, In PSIA-W, here are the "scoring standards"

Level II
Level III

If you prefer to keep your comments "private" so you don't skew other's thoughts, you can PM me with your "results"

This is all part of my process for building a library of Video. Eventually comments and videos will be compiled in one location.

DC

Poles seem too long. I know that's not what you were after but it was one of the first things that jumped out at me. The turns also have something of a frantic look to them.
The best skiers look unhurried and patient even when making short turns.

yd

The long poles aren't helping this skier to "stand tall" over his skis if that was a goal. He's too far back on his feet and moving from foot to foot rather than guiding both skis together. He's getting a zing off the ski tail, but he's not using the shovels to start the turns. Every turn is almost a recovery.

DC,

Nice video - this is how I like to shoot clips - straight on with the victim appropriately sized.

Using this scoring system from your level 2 link...
Short radius turns in fall line – maintain constant speed and radius
Done well
7 = All technical elements, flawless execution
6 = Has most technical elements.
5 = Has three technical elements.

Has problems
3 = Any technical problems.
2 = Two or more problems.
1 = Shows many problems.

and giving the guy the benefit of the doubt that either he was not tasked with staying in the fall line or my eyes are deceiving me that he is going across a double fall line or the trail was too narrow to stay in the fall line...

For this task, I'd give him a 6 and a 2 and pass him for level 2. He's showing he COULD stay in the fall line, is maintaining a constant speed, but he's a little wild on the last turn. He's got a bit of an up move instead of using the hips to initiate the turns. He compensates by using excessive rotary of the feet just above the fall line. Weight gets a little back and kicks up too much snow after the fall line. But I like the simultaneous edge change, the mostly symmetrical edge angles, good tipping of the boots. Overall, for level 2 I'd be tempted to flunk him for poles too long - inappropriate equipment. It just seems a little harsh for skiing that I would call strong.

For level 3, the judges would not bother to go to the score cards.

Rusty,

The scoring would be either 6 or 2 not both. The way the score works is

You look at the task elements. (of which there are several)
7=all the elements are done well, No flaws,
6=has most of the elements, No major flaws maybe a recovery or 2.
5=has some of the elements, No technical problems

4=would be a pass but no "4"s are given.

3=has any technical problems
2=has 2 or more technical problems
1=has many technical problems

If the skier did the task fair but had 1 technical problem (see the task description for problems) then it would be a final score of 3
If the skier did the task fair but no technical problems the final score for the task would be 5

re: Sizing, That's Adobe Premier doing the sizing and panning. I took the original clip, and did the pan and zoom using key frames. It's a little time intensive but it does a pretty good job.

The skier was coming right at the camera but was really quite small on the screen.

DC

I guess I should qualify this.

This would not be a task but part of our free skiing elements. The tasks are a little more specific.

I'm still hoping to get more info from Carl and some other members of the Alpine examiners for the scoring of the free skiing tasks at the level 2 and 3 exams.

I do know in SR turns they are looking for active edges, high edge angles, progressive edges and constant steering (not twisting) some counter and they want to see the skis "work". The speed control needs to be there and the COM needs to "flow" down the hill.

DC

DC,

Thanks. I'd give him a 5 then. But what do I know? The hard part about this scoring system is that you expect a bunch of minor flaws in level 2 skiing. There might be a case to say this guy was perfect for level 2. For example, his COM generally flows down the hill. For level 3, I'd say his COM "wobbles" on 3 axis.

Never thought of using the pan and zoom. That is too much work. Have you thought about getting a telephoto lens? Was wondering why the skier was so fuzzy.

just my perspectve, but the turns seem awefully rushed and hurried instead of fluid and natural. Furthermore, it didn't really look like many of the turns were completed which could be part of why they appeared hurried to me, as if speed control was a big issue here. It also didn't appear that the edges were engaging simultaniously (the second, third and fourth turns showed this with the fairly dramatic change in stance width and it appeared that a bit of a christie was used in turns 4 and 5). Some of the turns also appear to possibly have some tipping as well, which in turn were the same turns that looked to me as if there was a quick snap to edge in the turn (the late spray and sudden movement of the skis from edge to edge, it looked kind of like the skis were loaded up and not controled, and the skier was hanging on in an attempt to regain control of the skis). I would however say that these might pass level II, however it looks (might just be camera angle) like radius of the turns might vary and it also looks asif speed control is an issue. For level III I fear that these probably would not pass (not looking at the standards, but thinking back to my exams). However, the issues that I'm seeing, I think of as relatively easy fixes.

Dchan,
I finally figured out what is strange about this video. I can see that the camera appears to be moving along with the skier, like when the skier goes across the hill I can see things close up move across the screen. You must be doing this in processing. It makes it looks as if the skier isn't getting anything out of the turns because the viewer loses the point of reference.

Obviously the turns are not all the same radius, but who says they have to be. There is one turn that looks like it ends prematurely, but the skier may have been setting up for that that little pocket of powder down below. Either that or the skier is a one who skies to envisioned courses. Those several slight turns straight down the hill would be a hairpin.

There may be some tipping in the initiation and a sudden drop to leaned-in angulation. This technique works better on ice which adds to the suggestion that this is an old slalom skier. Also can see a move from pressured tips to either center or back at the bottom of the turn - especially in the last turn but the skier gets back to pressured tips in the turn where the video ends by going crosslots. You can see the energy of the ski released with retraction and they continue underneath and cross under although they leave the ground in that turn; the body moves down the hill at the sametime - it's combination cross-over/crossunder. The first full turn up above is very similar and despite the camera appearing to following, you can see that the skier gets quite aways across the hill using the acceleration of the turn in the fall line and the released energy.

The pole plants are true blocking pole plants. That makes the hand snap back. You can see, in pausing the clip, the classic French slalom move of the late sixties which the Italians took over in the early 70's - the planted arm extended, the upper body rotated (actually the body just keeps facing downhill and the lower body rotates underneath), and the weight middle or even back. I've even seen modern pictures with slalom racers in this position. But it's usually used when they are late. I think this is an old slalom skier.

The technique is not PSIA authorized and examiners would not score it, they'd just scratch their heads.

Oh ya, this is an old slalom skier alright, I know... CAUSE IT'S ME.

dchan, run the clip without the zoom, cause you can better see the across hill stuff.

This was not a good run however, and I wasn't in a good mood. I will send in some ice skiing next year.

Turnalot

dchan,
Not being familar with the wests scoring, I'll give it a shot using RM's 1-10.
1. There seems to be a stance issue, specificly for aft. All your flexion/extension moves originate out of your knees and hips, very little ankle invovement especialy in the lateral plane. So what's happening is you pop up ,twist your skis across the falline , hammer your edges at the finish phase of the turn to control your speed with a defensive/ blocking pole plant.
I'd like to see edge engagment well above the falline using ski design along with active guidence of the skis to produce a rounder turn shape for speed control/speed maintence. Working your ankles in a more lateral fashion will help with the fore /aft issues to keep you in a stronger skelatal relationship with your skis and hopefully help with your abillity to effectively deal with the resulting pressure.
2. Getting to the postve , I like your aggresiveness and commitment to each turn.
On a scale of 1-10 with 6 being passing for level 3, I'd give these a 4
Good luck and I hope these ideas help.
Chuckc

I am sure the folks who assessed this video are better at it than me. That said I will only add what has not been mentioned yet, though some comments are made to "no early angulation". As I am viewing the skier, the right hand turn has more banking than angulation. I blew up the video and paused it on each turn; there is almost a straight line at the apex of the turn. The left hand turns have no or very little banking. My comment, we know you can ski fast,,,,ski slow the next time you do video and ask for feedback.

ydnar, kneale,therusty,manus,chuckc,gregG,
I just want to say that all of your analysis is pretty much spot on. You have taken a series of turns and found the shortcomings in them as they relate to a PSIA test standard. The turns, of course, were not meant to meet that standard but as they are, I think you have picked the parts that might not meet the standard.

The turns are rushed. I set places on the hill where I want to be at a given time. I wasn't getting there. I was, indeed, almost throwing the skis into the new turn to get to where I wanted to be on the hill in order to get to where I wanted to be in my desired line and the next turn. But I am relentless in setting the line and turn standard for myself.

I wasn't getting the pressure down quick enough because I was late when looking down the hill to where I wanted to be and then pivoting too much. Now here's a big cop out, but what I was trying to do was not working in the conditions (what is this natural soft stuff anyway?) and equipment (184cm GS Dynastar skis).

The several really short unfinished turns that I made in the middle were a set up for that pocket of powder below. At the same time, I visualize a hairpin setup to maximize my use of the run. I know it's crazy, but alot of the time that's the way I think when I'm skiing. It comes from years of not being able to run gates.

Ahh, but powder pocket felt good. You could have seen it better without the video auditing - no disrespect intended dchan. Your editing, I think, was intended to just show the body for MA.

The last turn and the subsequent transition, I am pleased with. In that one the pressure is placed far above the apex. Again, without the auditing you could see it better, and see how far I got across the hill with the quasi jetting technique.

There was tipping and for that I'm not apologetic. I sometimes tip like a bastard at initiation.

I would love to submit some more video of different stuff and have you guys go off on it. Next year....

Turnalot