Nice turn at Aspen Highlands

Nice jacket!

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigE 

Nice jacket!

 

edit 

Weems, not really sure what you're gunning for here.   "What works in this turn?"  Don't know what works if we don't know what's trying to be accomplished.  I can't answer the second question, as I have the option to do what he's doing if I liked, and I like doing many different things.  Same with the third question,,, I'd do everything differently, if I wanted to, or nothing at all. 

I'll try this approach.  MA-

Arc to arc with an up move transition.  Low/moderate edge angle.  More inclinated and square than angulated and countered.  Outside foot dominant and center/fore balanced through the majority of the turn.  It's only wrong if there's something in that summation that's not what he was trying to do. 

www.YourSkiCoach.com

OK here is my very uneducated Opinion.

 Looks like a nice solid turn . It looks like the skier has dropped his inside hand and his shoulder?  Other then that nice jacket. How much and where can I get one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick 

Weems, not really sure what you're gunning for here.   "What works in this turn?"  Don't know what works if we don't know what's trying to be accomplished.  I can't answer the second question, as I have the option to do what he's doing if I liked, and I like doing many different things.  Same with the third question,,, I'd do everything differently, if I wanted to, or nothing at all. 

 

I'll try this approach.  MA-

Arc to arc with an up move transition.  Low/moderate edge angle.  More inclinated and square than angulated and countered.  Outside foot dominant and center/fore balanced through the majority of the turn.  It's only wrong if there's something in that summation that's not what he was trying to do. 

 

 

www.YourSkiCoach.com

x2.  This turn uses more energy than necessary due to the up move, but I'm sure it feels pretty good once he gets on his edges.
 

One thing to add to Rick's comments.  He appears to be trying to control speed by tightening up the arc, but he is doing this at the bottom instead of the top.  That isn't a good approach; the only reason he doesn't blow completely out of this turn is because the snow is forgiving.  Part of the trouble is that he releases too early from the previous turn so he has no opportunity to get early edge engagement.  The second problem is that he is center to aft balanced.  Because he isn't getting forward at the top of the turn, he isn't going to be able to pressure the forebody of the ski effectively even with early engagement, so the ski isn't going to bend enough early enough.  He needs to pull both feet back in transition so he can move his hips down and forward into the turn instead of just down.  This will move his balance forward.  With that he can pressure earlier and get a clean, round arc instead of a J.

All of that said (and echoing Rick), it probably isn't fair to do an MA without having context on what the skier is trying to accomplish.  I personally don't like turns like this because they don't work in all conditions.  As such, I don't feel like this is a model that anyone who isn't already an expert skier should strive to follow. OTOH, plenty of folks would rather adopt a more relaxed style for more relaxed conditions.  If that is what this skier is after, then I would say he has succeeded.  The only question is whether he can ramp up his technique when it gets nasty (and whether he even wants that ability if he doesn't have it).

Great snow conditions. Ski. More counter and angulation.

Nice photography.  I also like some of the photos on cesarpiotto.com. 

It's not a style of skiing that I aspire to, and I wouldn't want to borrow any of this skier's technique; however, given the jacket I'm sure it meets his needs well.  I leave the attempt at constructive MA to those who might wish to ski like this skier.

It's always nice to have a chance to see and study skillful photography of skiers in motion.  Thanks for posting this sample.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharpedges 

It's always nice to have a chance to see and study skillful photography of skiers in motion.  Thanks for posting this sample.

On that subject, I kinda wonder if all of the frames are lined up exactly right.

As soon as I saw this picture go up I figured we'd be getting the comments we are seeing. Won't say I disagree with all of them. What I do like about the skiing is that his movements are progressive throughout the turn. That is to say he doesn't just dump himself in and stay there.

If it were me skiing, I would most likely spend less time in the transition, probably use more of a letting go of the old turn and have my momentum carry me quickly into the new turn which would start closer to where the old one finished, but then again I would probably be skiing faster and hence have more momentum to do it with.  Maybe he lengthened out that transition to mug for the camera.

Quote:

Originally Posted by weems 

Interesting stuff.  Thanks, guys.

 

Rick's comment is very wise in that knowing intention would help.  I just asked him to make a "semi" dynamic medium long turns.

 

And Geoffda, I generally agree that I'm trying to get more of the shape in my turns a bit higher in the turn, so that I can release earlier (like he seems to have done in the previous turn).  But I don't agree that this isn't a good approach. The comment that he is quite square at the end, and bending the ski at the end, just implies to me that he wants to drive it further across the hill, before dropping into a new turn.  In that sense, I think it's a fine approach.  Again, this refers to Rick's idea, of "what's he trying to do".

 

Also, Geoffda, a couple of questions:

If he releases early from the previous turn doesn't that give him ample opportunity to engage wherever he wants?--earlier or later?

If he wants the ski to bend later, then wouldn't going more forward at that point over-engage it? Or overbend it for the end.  If he pulls both feet back in transition isn't it possible that this would engage it earlier than he wants, given the turn that he does?

If he is not being blown out of his turn because the snow is forgiving, is he not then skiing just fine for the snow he's in?

 

Anyway, I do appreciate your thoughts, Rick and Goeffda.  My purpose was partly to just see where people tend to go with this kind of a picture--especially when given the opportunity to see "what works".

 

My opinion is that we tend to be very critical in MA--even in the new model we use in PSIARM.  The tendency to see something wrong is deeply ingrained in the culture.

 

In my next post on this thread, I'll give my own analysis.  And by the way, Eddie can truly ramp it up when he needs to.  This is one of the truly fine skiers in our school, and just rocks on the terrain at the Highlands--in all conditions. One of the things I like about his skiing is that he can do it at the level he needs to without overshooting.

 

 

 

Hey Weems,
 

So with his previous turn, he releases with his skis pointing well down the fall line.  By doing that, he doesn't really give himself the option of engaging at the top of the turn--he's effectively cut that off.  As you say, intent is everything, but this doesn't set himself up very well for speed control.  Basically, his only option is to do what he does--which is to crank hard at the bottom of the turn and hope he holds.  So if the intent is to arc turns without accelerating, a better approach would be to release a bit later to allow a transition with the skis more across the fall-line which would enable pressuring the ski through the top of the turn.  C-shaped arcs control speed, J shaped arcs result in acceleration.

If he had to release early for some reason (like avoiding a rock, person, etc), a better approach would have been (assuming there is room) to not try to overfinish the bottom of the current turn, but instead to focus on getting on top of the following turn.

Because he is cranking so hard at the bottom of the turn, I felt it reasonable to assume his intent was speed control, which is why I stand by my claim that his approach isn't a good one (if that is his intent).  It will not work on ice. 

But he isn't on ice and his skis do hold.  At least for this turn, the skiing isn't smooth (accelerate, followed by hard cranking) but it is effective.  He might also be reacting to stuff we can't see in the picture.  

Is that the kind of turn I look for in my skiing?  No.  But as I said, I prefer a turn that works well regardless of conditions.  Without knowing what he is looking for in his skiing, all I can do is apply my own standards.  Knowing that he's a good skier, I'd be interested in his own analysis and to understand his intent.

To me it looks like a great day w/ good conditions & he was just out ripping, not worrying too much about anything.  Which is great, but it isn't necessarily reference skiing. 

BTW, hopefully nobody thinks I'm trying to rip on anyone's skiing when I say it isn't what I'm looking for.  It's all about frame of reference.  My models for the way I want to ski are people like Jeremy Nobis, Ingrid Backstrom, Eric & Rob DesLauriers, Kristin Ulmer, Hisaya Sato.  I actually don't know much about Hisaya, except that he is a CSIA IV from Japan and he freaking rips: http://www.vimeo.com/3371564.  This is my definition of great skiing and while I'm not there yet, I have a pretty good idea of how to get there.

Anyway, there are lots of other definitions for great skiing out there, but everyone who is serious about skiing should have one (and understand what it takes to get there).  When it comes to MA, it is important to understand whether the giver's and receiver's definitions of greatness align.  Get MA from people who understand your vision of skiing and can help you get there.  Consider alternative technique as well, but don't be afraid to reject it if it doesn't fit with what you are trying to achieve. 

WRT to my MA, it only matters if you want to ski like me .

Quote:

Originally Posted by geoffda 

BTW, hopefully nobody thinks I'm trying to rip on anyone's skiing when I say it isn't what I'm looking for.  It's all about frame of reference.  My models for the way I want to ski are people like Jeremy Nobis, Ingrid Backstrom, Eric & Rob DesLauriers, Kristin Ulmer, Hisaya Sato.  I actually don't know much about Hisaya, except that he is a CSIA IV from Japan and he freaking rips: http://www.vimeo.com/3371564.  This is my definition of great skiing and while I'm not there yet, I have a pretty good idea of how to get there.

 

Anyway, there are lots of other definitions for great skiing out there, but everyone who is serious about skiing should have one (and understand what it takes to get there).  When it comes to MA, it is important to understand whether the giver's and receiver's definitions of greatness align.  Get MA from people who understand your vision of skiing and can help you get there.  Consider alternative technique as well, but don't be afraid to reject it if it doesn't fit with what you are trying to achieve. 

 

WRT to my MA, it only matters if you want to ski like me .

Hisaya Sato

Holy cow - I watched the video -- that guy does rip!

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by weems 

 

My opinion is that we tend to be very critical in MA--even in the new model we use in PSIARM.  The tendency to see something wrong is deeply ingrained in the culture.

 

 

 

Weems, I'll pay that.  Seems people/schools/pros have over the years had the persistent habit of falling into the trap of pursuing the newest, bestest, coolest, most cutting edge look/turn/transition/drill/term of the season.  And the theme du jour is ever changing.  It's always been that way through the 45 years I've been involved in this sport.  In the end, the truth always returns to what it's always been;  great skiing is found in a broad set of foundation skills that can be melded into a package of great technical versatility. 

Your friend's skiing appears very balanced and relaxed.  I'm quite reluctant to classify it good/bad, right/wrong.  Skiing is about freedom of expression, and the individual picking of pleasure.  I'm currently in the process of building the final 2 DVD's of the Building Blocks Instructional Series.  I shot the footage for them over the last couple months, and they will contain more than 30 different turn types and transitions.  Geoffida is right in his contention that everyone should look around and pursue the model that they fancy.  I'd also suggest they sample the assortment on the buffet table before loading their plate.  Technical versatility not only provides a larger menu for experiencing fun, it builds a core skill base that makes the execution of any chosen technical option more proficient and refined. 

www.YourSkiCoach.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by weems 

Exactly.  I'm looking forward to your DVD's, Rick.

 

By the way, one of the other lenses through which I look is what you say:  Versatility.  I add to that Effectiveness and Efficiency.

 

Effectiveness:  getting it done

Efficiency:  getting it done at the least cost

Versatility:  getting it done everywhere

 

(whatever "it" is!)

How about the 3 E's?

Effectiveness (which I'll include versatility under so I can have my E's )

Efficiency

Elegance

He's not wearing a helmet... 

Quote:

Originally Posted by spindrift 

He's not wearing a helmet... 

 

 

He's not at Vail either...

 The 5th/middle image shows good, balanced angles.

 Arc fast turns on a nice groomer.

I would try to maintain the level shoulders & counter that is developing in the 5th photo throughout the turn.

JF

Quote:

Originally Posted by weems 

Geoffda, is elegance the same as style?

 

I agree with you about skiers like Nobis.  (I once rollerbladed with him and my older son on Martha's Vineyard.  We were all wearing backpacks as our luggage for the trip.  He was doing GS turns---IN TRAFFIC!)

 

I will also tell you that Eddie Sciarrone in the sequence above really rips, when he wants to.

 

Thanks for your responses.

Elegance == Style?  Sure, I think so.  Or to put it plainly "looking good".  All subjective of course.  I know what I want to look like, which may well be different from what you want to look like. 

Do you remember a movie called "Wild Skis" that came out in the 70's?  They sent some skiers to Dizin in Iran (this was during the time of the Shah) and they were skiing with a princess.  She said something to the effect of "she'd been criticized in France for skiing too much like an Austrian, then criticized in Austria for skiing with too much of a French style."  I always liked that story because it is so true.  We all have our own prism through which we evaluate skiing and absent being provided any framework to the contrary, that is what we'll use.  That is why it is so important for both student and instructor to have a mutually agreed upon framework for evaluating good skiing. 

I wonder if perhaps this relates to your concern that sometimes we get too critical when doing MA?  Perhaps what we are seeing is not an abundance of unnecessary criticism, but rather subtle (or not so subtle) disconnects between the reviewer's and the reviewee's image of great skiing.  For example, I drop my inside hands a bit when I ski.  It isn't because I don't angulate enough; its purely in the shoulders.  It doesn't affect my ability to hold, but it drives me nuts because I just don't like the way it looks and I want it gone from my skiing.  So I appreciate it when my training buddy points out that I'm dropping my hand because that is pushing me to work towards where he knows I want to go.

OTOH, if you put me in that Highlands sequence above (PLEASE--conditions looked awesome ) you would see me making (I hope) turns with lots of hip angulation and counter.  If you didn't know what I was trying to accomplish with my skiing, you might suggest I relax, angulate only as much as I need to and ski into counter.  And that would be a perfectly valid thing to say.  You can ski that way effectively, efficiently, and elegantly in those conditions (as Eddie demonstrates).  Except that I want to ski differently and I have my own equally valid reasons for choosing a different style.  So if you gave me that feedback, I would regard it as nit-picky, unwarranted criticism whereas a skier with different goals could be far more receptive to those comments.

I am a software developer by trade, so instead of seeing things in right or wrong, I try to see things in terms of trade-offs.  We decide which trade-offs to make based on more core values.  For example, we might decide to trade time for quality.  We might decide that something is so important to get right for our customers that we are willing to take the pain of shipping late.  Or vice-versa.  Sometimes getting a working solution out there as soon as possible is more important than having it work perfectly.

Skiing is the same way.  What some folks tend to see in terms of right and wrong are far better viewed in terms of trade-offs and outcomes.  Just because different people would make different trade-offs in the same situation doesn't mean that either of them are wrong. 

Can you tell from the length of my response that the weather is bad at A-Basin today?

Good discussion, geoffa/weems.  On on deck with most of what you're both saying.  There's no best answer for all situations, that's why it's beneficial to develop the ability to apply different choices to different situations.  Or, efficiency be damned, make choices based solely on the personal fun factor.   

I'll also add that great skiers can make "wrong" look elegant. 

www.YourSkiCoach.com