Bad Rotation (video)

TDK,
Got back from my fishing trip early and noticed the new video. While I have a philosophical aversion to using words like good or bad, the improvements in the film make it a better production. I do have a question and a comment about how the application changes a bit in the freeskiing segment.
In the drill you show a lot of externally rotated shoulder action that is reigned in during the free skiing segment. Notice how in the stop action segment the shoulders face the side of the hill a bit more than in the free skiing segment where they face the fall line the whole time? It almost suggests you switch to leg steering since the pelvis faces downhill more as well. What that also means IMO is the angulation and countered stance happen later in the freeskiing turns than they do in the drill. So IMO this also means you are using a more inclinated stance early in the freeskiing turns than you show in the drill. Not a bad thing IMO but something that is noticable, so you may want to write a conclusion that includes some sort of commentary about how you change the Duration, Intensity, Rate, and Timing of these movements.

Edited by justanotherskipro - 7/4/2009 at 03:07 pm GMT

^^^
Perhaps add in those comments in "Lesson 2", otherwise it would be too much for someone who would benefit from the video, i.e. someone who is skiing like the "bad" skiing.

A minor nit, and I don't know how much effort you want to spend on production details:
For me, at least on this computer, the green letters are much more legible than the red ones.

I like the idea of a short lesson that makes just one point.

Explaining how you went from a drill to blending and applying the suggested changes is all I'm talking about. A summary and conclusion if you will...

I can't see a thing. It must have been dark out


Regardless of content I would like to commend TDK for his work on this project. It is a difficult undertaking for the highly experienced and must be a big challenge for someone new at this ,very public,undertaking. Here's to you T   


I think you have had some really good input and hope you can digest what they are sharing for your own understanding of the concepts they feel so strongly about.

Good luck with this T

Me too. If you throw out too many concepts they become lost to the learner.

If you go fishing you gotta have good bait. Same applies to threads. Glad to see so many new ones hopping in. JASP, the freeskiing segment I put in after a request. It does not really fit perfectly for many reasons but it happens to be from the same day and sits under the same media folder on my portable. Remember that this is an ultra light production. Also my cloths and the light are the same so there is no big contrast. But you are right, my upper body does not really counter the same way. This clip was actually made as a demo of anticipation so Im more than happy you spotted it. Turns are carved but upper body faces down hill.

Your suggestions regarding the commentary are great but remember the ultra light edition. I could spit it up into beginners HIP lesson, intermediate HIP lesson and advanced HIP lesson where the media would be the same but the commentary would be different. On the other hand, Im more of a lower end instructor and I like keeping things to bare basics. Also keeping it basic makes it more universal. YOU come up with the conclusion. Max two screens of short commentary.

Good point. My audience is deffinetly the guys and gals skiing like in the BAD department. IMHO it can be usefull for all levels as said in the commentary but know it all snobs have no problem picking it all apart. Its all about the lesson. Not how accurate the skiing is. Even if only one person benefitted from it it would be a success.

You write one. When I wake up in the morning I expect you to have the draft ready .

Thanks for the input mdf. Its not a minor nit. Its a huge bolt (whatever that is). Thanks for pointing it out. The text in read looked ok but I notissed that after the render it became blurry. Im going to change the color but Im not sure if it will be as visual. Check out version v5 that will include JASP's summary and conclusion commentary.

Thanks for supporting the short lesson consept.

Tom

Cheers to you as well for good spirit and nice words . The input in this thread has been more than what I had expected. Now I know the ass-bone is attached to the hip-bone  and a million other things.

TDK, Sorry to not have a commentary this morning. I was out watching fireworks last night. Lots of family and way too much picnic food. I can't think of a better way to spend a holiday though...
...So I'll write something this morning but mind you I am going to do so in a way that will help you write your own commentary, not write it for you. Your production needs your words to make it genuine and uniquely yours. Let me say I teach my instructors how to craft a lesson plan but for it  to come across as genuine during a lesson, it needs to be their words not a script I wrote for them. So what follows is not about content as much as how to package the content in segments that the student understands and can incorporate without the need for a lot of follow up explanations. Said another way, I am walking them through the lesson and letting them know all along the way what and why we're doing things. It doesn't need to be complex, or verbose but it encourages a student to stay mentally involved as well as introduces the idea of making tactical choices and executing them with more deliberate purpose. The good turn bad turn idea has been really well done in the past. The format I am suggesting is only one option but it follows the framework of some of the more successful Good turn bad turn presentations I've seen. 

Showing the skier you are targeting free skiing gives you an establishing shot. Giving context to the lesson plan, a baseline movement pattern that we will be modifying. Front, back, and side views are typically used and basic MA commentary is done at this point to identify the movement error we are wanting to target.
In this case, the idea of the inside shoulder dropping back, turning the torso and subsequently the skis would be a place to start. (Notice I am not suggesting starting at the hips. We'll get there but not until we identify where the rotary forces originate.) As the torso rotates towards the center of the turn, the pelvis follows suit but as it turns, it rotates around a pivot point in front of the body. Sort of like a dog wagging it's tail, the pelvis swings back and forth.

(Note: instead of concentrating on where the front of the pelvis is facing, I choose to describe the movement as the tailbone wagging. This is so I can include specific advice about the rotation you mentioned TDK. E and SD are correct in saying that calling it hip rotation creates confusion because the term usually means turning the pelvis around an internal pivot point, which you do not do in the video until you get to the free skiing segment BTW.) 

What follows are examples of what happens when we "wag" the tailbone to the outside of the turn, followed by examples of "wagging" it to the inside of the turn. Can you feel the skis acting differently as we swing the hips and the tailbone in each direction? One flattens the skis to the snow and causes the skis to pivot and skid across the snow, The other causes the skis to tip onto a higher edge angle and makes the edges bite and the skis slice across the snow surface. Since we want to cause the skis to carve, we want to use the movement that will create a strongly edged platform. Can you tell me which of these movements will produce that outcome?
(This is where you would practice both movements and lead your students to a conclusion about both movement patterns. This must happen before moving on to the incorporation of the more effective move into some free skiing)

Now that we understand how the different pelvic moves affect what the skis do, it's time to incorporate this into our free skiing. To do so we need to think about only using as much of this movement as needed, instead of exaggerating it like we did in the drills segment.You will notice in my example of free skiing my pelvis and shoulders face down the hill almost all the time.
( BTW, TDK I would replace the free skiing segment with a more relevant one, It simply would take too much to explain going from the tailbone wagging movement to a leg steering movement)

Hope this helps,
JASP
Edited by justanotherskipro - 7/5/2009 at 04:20 pm GMT
Edited by justanotherskipro - 7/5/2009 at 04:25 pm GMT

A million thanks JASP. Here is the version I made last night before reading your reply, v5. I will get back to your posting later, in the mean time here is the latest version:

After looking over this thread again I am wondering about your choice to contrast upper body steering with counter and angulation. I think this is where you got attention from Kneale, E and Skidude in their understanding of how you are trying to accomplish your goal of separation and using lower body movements to accomplish their turns.
The contrast to locked torso and  upper body skiing is upper /lower body separation and using turning movements that originate near the snow. This is an important concept to learn and to teach.

If this were my student i would work with them first to get some separation and encourage lower body movements to turn the skis. Steering in entry parallel.

In your video it seems there is a big reach in skills to go from upper body steering to carving with angulation , strong inside half turn entry and counter.

With an emphasis on lower body turning skills the big  hip movements become unnecessary  as they have learned a better tool to turn with. After they learn  better lower body movements then go to more dynamic balancing over an edged ski.

I like your work on this project  but feel I would go a completely different direction before introducing angulation over an edged ski. They need miles on using their lower body and sidecut  to understand what they offer to them . A more advanced class would be more ready to understand angulation over an edged ski . A lessor one would be better off learning to steer at first with their feet   leading to higher edging skills. I think they need to learn to walk before you teach them to fly if they are using a locked body to twist them into their turns

My intention was not to contrast upper body steering with counter and angulation. My intention was to contrast upper body rotation with angulation and counter. If we take the math approach we would end up with upper body steering = upper body rotation. If the clip I had at hand would have included proper steering I should have used it insted. But I have no such material from that day of skiing. Now I only included that in the comentary. Thanks for the input.

TDK,
The shoulder moves inside and out are what you're contrasting TDK. Any angulation, counter rotary movements, or inclination that happens is a consequence, or a response to the shoulder movement. Notice just how active the shoulders are in the drills segments.
Contrast that with how in the skiing segment the movements are in the legs and hips.It is a wholesale change in movements because the shoulders are relatively static. I know you're worried about the whole thing showing some continuity but clothes and lighting are quite secondary to showing technical continuity. If I were you I would use a different clip that features a refined version of the move you targeted and not worry so much about the clothes or lighting, it's superfluous.

Brilliant feedback JASP . Ok, so the video should be about: "How proper use of shoulders can boost your carving/skiing"! Should I make a new version?

TDK.
If you want to contrast angulation and inclination the shoulder rotation movements are not how you develop either when you ski. Making a connection between those two ideas can be done but I would question using upper body movements to develop a rotated, or a counter rotated pelvis. Especially since in the free skiing segment the shoulders don't move around like in the drills segment. Maybe showing both as errors and contrasting it with how you develop counter in the lower body as you free ski would make more sense. Then again it all depends on what you're trying to say in the learning segment.

Careful! I think I see this becoming a two-headed double feature.

I'm not sure why it would become anything more than it already is. The feedback and advice I've offered has been quite consistent. The drills are drills. They produce contrived positions with the expressed purpose of exaggerating body movements in the shoulders and hips. The eventual target being to teach angulation and counter rotary in the hips (pelvis). To question why TDK is using the shoulders to develop hip angulation and a counter rotated pelvis is, IMO a valid question. Especially when the final segment features the feet and legs being so active while the shoulders are not. It's almost like TDK is using the top of the body in the drills and bottom of the body in the free skiing segment.  

Good input here above and good questions JASP.

Free skiing segment
I agree that the freeskiing segment is not perfect in this tutorial video. In the drill segment Im actively angulating by bending sideways at the waist while in the freeskiing segment I use a cross under retracton type of technique where angulation is a result of feet extending to the side while I remain upright with my upper body with levelled shoulders. Furthermore I keep facing downhill all the time and starting my turns anticipated insted of countered. If you look at this too critically this is offcourse a show stopper but I merely wanted to include a free skiing segment so that people could contrast drills and skiing. When I upload the video to my computer I usually use an external HD. In this case I have the video uploaded to my laptop and the video files are saved under my project. Its a bit goofy and timy to scout for other video segments under other projects especially since I have no here at my laptop (summer problem). That is the reason I cannot include any other video at the moment.

Quote
"I would question using upper body movements to develop a rotated, or a counter rotated pelvis".

I was kind of working out of the simplified scenario that the upper body from hips up would be more like one entity and that the shoulders and pelvis areas would work together rather than individually. Especially adult intermediate skiers are quite stiff and when they rotate their upper body they rotate everything.

Actually if you look at the video I perform a BAD move. My suggestion is to correct it with the GOOD move. Up for debate is if the GOOD move is the solution to the BAD move. I have defined the GOOD move to be ANGULATION and and the BAD move to be HIP ROTATION and BANKING. Everyone did not agree so I have changed it along the way. You are suggesting that the BAD move is rotating the shoulders into the turn. That is a correct and valid observation and I have sofar not mentioned it in the video. But IMO this shoulder rotation movement drags my hips out in the turn. Without refering to old postings, how would you like to change the video?

For those guys who dont know what this is all about I will give you a quick brifing. Its an experiment. I made a short tutorial video on "hip rotation" and posted it in this thread. The ide is for readers here to give input and tweek the video. In other words, its interactive. To see the original and tweeked versions go back and scroll through this thread. There are many. 

Whats new: I recieved a PM from one reader that said he did not see angulation in my freeskiing segment do I did some changes to the text in the summary. I also deleted the free skiing segment at the beginning. I did some other minor changes as well since I had not watched the video all summer and lots of stuff was hurting my eyes. And then I added a soundtrack.




Edit: sorry wrong link, now fixed
Edited by tdk6 - 10/25/09 at 1:14pm

Interesting video, tdk6...

I have one concern about the exaggerated angulation: if a skier were to look at that video and think that the "right" way to do this is to really lean out over that outside ski while really tipping their skis under them, they may end up in a very compromised position... and may limit their growth. I'm reminded of something that Weems mentioned to me a couple of years ago: the strongest position is inclined as much as the snow conditions will support. Here in Colorado, we're blessed with snow that allows us to use a very high degree of inclination and not much angulation at all for much of our skiing.

Just something to consider. I like your idea of contrasting the less effective skiing to the more effective. Do you think that there are some feeling cues that you could give the audience so that they could tell if they are doing what you are advocating?

Great ide ssh, but maybe you could give me some examples.

People here generally feel that Im overly angulated and maybe I am but IMHO when you start to learn these movements you need to exagerate the movements. Usually when you think you angulate a lot you really are not. Also remember that carving is so powerful that if you really dont put a lot of effort into your skiing you will loose momentum and power. Or whatever you want to call it. This video takes a focus on hips and what happens if you let your hips wonder out in the turn. Its about balance really and how your hips fit in the equation. Thats why the hips move a lot so that people can see what they are dooing. There is a comment at the end that the movements are exaggerated.

Thanks for your feedback and for taking your time and watching it.

t

In answer, may I pose a question that may be illustrative? 

Can you move your hips into the turn without angulating?

In a way that is what Im doing in the WRONG department. The opposite of angulation.

Well, I prefer to angulate only as much as absolutely necessary given the conditions and my preferred speed and line. This means that I will incline more than I angulate, and I do not view that as "wrong". It stacks me better, allows the big muscles of my body to do their thing (sometimes inaccurately described as "stacking the skeleton"), and in general is a stronger position. However, for many conditions, angulation is necessary. When it is, I argue that you want to use the minimum possible to get the result you seek.

I disagree that you are moving your hips inside without angulating in the "wrong" department, btw. You are using rotation without moving your hips inside. If you moved your hips inside, you'd increase the edge angle and, at some point, begin to carve.

I might have said something wrong because I dont quite understand the last paragraph. Its perfectly ok not to angulate a lot but even if you are using "inclination" as your primary move for projection into the turn there is usually some angulation present as well. Especially as pressure builds up and you need to improve your balance. Pure angulation with a levelled shoulder line through out the whole turn from start to finnish is not what angulation is all about. Its about using it sufficiently. By "inclination" you move the hips into the turn without angulating but the expression is "also" descriptive for a scenario where the hips are moved to the inside of the turn in reference to an axis from your skis to your head, the inclination axis. That means that even if you incline your hips are still not "inside" even though they are moved towards the inside of the turn. This IMHO offcourse. I should have included a clip of pure inclination. It did not occour to me at the time since I was thinking more of contrasting bad with good. And took one bad example and one good. And I had no script to go by. It was not planned.

This video also doesent really take in account how much angulation is sufficient just what it is and what it does. If you for example dont need angulation then I suggest you dont use any. Its a good way to work out a good balance from inclination. Back in the 80s we practissed something that my coach called motorbice turning. There we were supposed to stand completely upright and incline without angulation.

Think about it like this:

When you move your hips inside of your feet in the turn, you must stay in balance. You can stay in balance by inclining your entire body the amount necessary to balance over your feet with your body basically vertical with respect to the top surface of your skis ("pure inclination"). This can only provide you one purely carved turn radius at that speed, since you can't adjust the edge angle by definition, and your inclination is determined by your speed relative to the slope.

This is not a very adaptive technique!

However, if you take that inclination and add angulation to it in order to adjust the tipping of the skis to increase or decrease edge angle (most often the former), you are using both angulation and inclination.

My preference is to use inclination first and adjust edge angle from there with angulation.

In your video it appears to me that you are using angulation first with inclination very limited. This is partially due to your speed, but it one of the reasons that you appear so static even in the "angulation turns", I think.

Does this make more sense? Thanks for reading my comments!

Thanks for your input ssh. So there should be a text box at the beginning saying:

Angulation should be progressive. Start your turn with inclination. As pressure builds up add angulation to inclination in order to adjust the tipping of the skis to increase or decrease edge angle.

Or?