Mythbusting the QCT (short turn MA) - Page 3  

I'm with you, ironic pretty much describes the reality.  Pivot turns are not penalized in competitive mogul skiing, the judges could care less how the ski is used as long as a "tight" body position is maintained.  I agree, I could care less about body position as it should be a secondary critique.  The FIS rules are a simply not adhered to or the judges don't understand what the difference between a carved turn and a pivot are, or they do know the difference and simply don't care.

I admit I'm reading a lot into the pic, I've seen the contorted body position repeatedly before, it results from a pivot turn.   What I'm seeing is a classic pivot/slip/skid body position just after lateral impact and there is no way the skis are carving in any way, as the tips never arced through the location the tails are in now.  The turn isn't even a skidded carve, it's a pivot.

If you want to see the position again, just look at the skier on the left in the still title image of the YouTube video I posted just above.  The skier is in an almost a identical body position to the image you posted, femurs pointing slightly  to the skiers left and ankles pointing to the skiers right.  Watch the video, it's a pivot turn.  The skier on the right screen is carving turns, it's actually a QCT and there is a lot a recreational skier can learn from watching that skiing.

Again,  sadly  I have to generally agree.  It doesn't have to be and shouldn't be this way though.  If the "carving" rule were adhered to , the sport of competitive mogul skiing would promote technically advanced techniques that the recreational skier could emulate and learn from.  Currently the sport promotes avoiding the mogul almost completely by consistently skiing around them with most skiers dependent on a pivot turn to navigate the zipperline.

Watched the world cup moguls at Deer Valley yesterday on tv.

30 degree pitch, 300 yards long , two jumps and perfect formed moguls. Looked icy though.

It was an all Canadian final which I didn't watch. The prelims were in fact about all i could stand. It was an awesome display of skill but not much skiing skill. Didn't even resemble the mogul skiing normal humans do.

I don't know. I'm flip flopping from my original argument about zipperline skiing. At least at this speed. It's nuts and unlike anything i could care to do at this point in life.

It's really too bad mogul skiing has come to this. It was alot more fun in the 80's when quality turns and a few heli's made the day. And like many other things these days, I'm glad I won't be around much longer to see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nailbender 

Quote:

ssh wrote:

 

Ironically, "carving" is also a key part of scoring, so according to the judges, the technique in your video must be carved or he'd be penalized:

 

I'm with you, ironic pretty much describes the reality.  Pivot turns are not penalized in competitive mogul skiing, the judges could care less how the ski is used as long as a "tight" body position is maintained.  I agree, I could care less about body position as it should be a secondary critique.  The FIS rules are a simply not adhered to or the judges don't understand what the difference between a carved turn and a pivot are, or they do know the difference and simply don't care.

 

I admit I'm reading a lot into the pic, I've seen the contorted body position repeatedly before, it results from a pivot turn.   What I'm seeing is a classic pivot/slip/skid body position just after lateral impact and there is no way the skis are carving in any way, as the tips never arced through the location the tails are in now.  The turn isn't even a skidded carve, it's a pivot.

 

If you want to see the position again, just look at the skier on the left in the still title image of the YouTube video I posted just above.  The skier is in an almost a identical body position to the image you posted, femurs pointing slightly  to the skiers left and ankles pointing to the skiers right.  Watch the video, it's a pivot turn.  The skier on the right screen is carving turns, it's actually a QCT and there is a lot a recreational skier can learn from watching that skiing.

 

Quote:

ssh wrote:

 

This is one of the many reason I find discussion of competitive mogul skiing to be largely immaterial to recreational mogul skiers. We can certainly learn from their technique, but they use different equipment seeking a different outcome on different bumps than we will ever encounter outside a competitive arena.

 

Again,  sadly  I have to generally agree.  It doesn't have to be and shouldn't be this way though.  If the "carving" rule were adhered to , the sport of competitive mogul skiing would promote technically advanced techniques that the recreational skier could emulate and learn from.  Currently the sport promotes avoiding the mogul almost completely by consistently skiing around them with most skiers dependent on a pivot turn to navigate the zipperline.

I don't know if you're right about the pic or not. I wasn't using it to show anything other than the distance the inside ski edges were apart. I don't watch competitive mogul skiing for all the reasons you and Lars point out. Not only do they not teach much useful, but they often show technique that is counterproductive for a recreational skier. And, frankly, I find it boring.

I agree with your final paragraph, which is, again, why I don't use competitive mogul skiing as a model. Frankly, I think a solid SL racer is a better model--especially in a rutted course--for learning how to manage skis in challenging terrain.

LOL, couldn't even sit through the commercials to watch the finals, I didn't even make it to the prelims. 

I'm with you Lars, these young people are incredible athletes, but I could care less about the event or outcome and I've got a 10 yr. old that is competing, frustrating and disappointing is an understatement.

The replay of the Lake Placid event was re-run on Versus this week, I almost had to force him to watch, this is a kid that is basically either skiing moguls or jumping when he's on the hill.   He thought the airs were incredible, but the skiing was relentless high speed pivot slams which he found boring  and left him unimpressed, he has no desire to ski like that.  It's crazy, the man-made zipperlines have removed skiing from mogul skiing for the most part.  The astonishing speeds make it obvious that the perfect zipperlines are way to easy to navigate, especially at the Nor-Am and WC levels, basically a high speed track linking the jumps.  It's a made for TV event that basically showcases the same run over and over again, all season long, boring and uninspiring.

I think we like watching the same highlight reels...in case you missed it on the other thread, there's a lot of subtle QCT movements to be gleaned from CVJ's video.  It's all there, "stuffing the tips", backside turn, zipperline, deflecting and some banking too.

The only part of the fis criteria used is about how the body looks...................................................... They are not judging turns air or speed they judge mistakes not skiing.

Skiers can only lose points not get more points after 1st three turns they give your turns a score that can not go up only down. Suggest they watch what the skis are doing instead of some myth about how your upper body looks.

It is how they hit the mogul that is different. WC skiers hit the mogul more from the side with the ski hitting more from the side. Skiers hit the mogul more head on with the tips 1st straight on loading the tip of the ski not the side of the ski from the toe piece back. This what I see in the video.

Also look at today's GS skis they are back to less side cut but they still carve don't they? Skiing a 23 meter radius ski that will make as many QCT as any ski on the market.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cvj 

Also look at today's GS skis they are back to less side cut but they still carve don't they? Skiing a 23 meter radius ski that will make as many QCT as any ski on the market.

cvj, have you thought about taking a few clips of your SVMM video and posting it so people can get a better undertstanding of your technique. Like a clip that covered the rebound and boot flex sections from 6:30 into the video to 7:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by tdk6 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssh 

Those arced turns in the bumps were on 12m SL skis? Ok, count me as shocked by the length of the turns. I often demonstrate carving on bumps in a similar way on my 15m or 17m Nordicas, and make significantly shorter turns than those using higher edge angles, so I'm just very unclear of your intent there versus mine.

 

I like those turns with your feet more apart! Well done! The forces are helping you much more than in the other stance. I'm not talking about preferences, but rather about what happens to the force vectors. With your feet together, the inside edges of  your skis are approximately under the centerline of your body and your knees are together, making independent flexing much more difficult. The inside leg has a more difficult time collapsing as a result of the knees being so close together, and the force vector pushes more of the pressure towards the center and outside of the outside ski instead of towards the inside edges. All of this means that it is more difficult to apply that force to the inside edge of the outside ski when your feet are closer together.

 

Of course, anyone can ski however they want, but I find it helpful to understand the implications of various positions and movements.

 

I also disagree about the implications of sidecut on turn shape and the movements and muscular support you have to apply to shorten your turns with different sidecuts. The extent to which the sidecut doesn't matter is the extent to which you're not using the sidecut (and therefore some element of "carving") to make the turns.

Yes, a FIS racing SL ski turn radius is close to a 17m recreational ski turn radius. Its very stiff and in such soft snow and at such slow speeds it really not performing yet. I doubt that you can arc much tighter edge locked turns in such conditions. Every time you get airborn your skis would be losing its grip and your feet would be gone from underneath you. Im not saying that you cannot carve tighter and with more inclination but you cannot ignore the physics involved.

 

Your statements about how much more efficient a wider stance is compared to a more narrow one are probaly ture. However, when you make short turns like I do in the video or if you apply them in bumps a close stance is sufficient. No need for bigger edge angles. Also, by skiing with my skis together there is less need for independent flexing and extending. I try to use both legs as simultaniously as possible using a two footed stance. I try to do the same when skiing in powder the traditional way. I would deffinetly say that its "easier" to ski bumps in a narrow stance.

 

As we can read from the bump rating chart "carving" in the bumps is different to carving on the pist. If I apply the bump definition of carving to regular brushed turns then the all correct turns should be carved. They should be evenly arced and shaped = carved. The sidecut of the ski has thus littel or nothing to do with such "carved" turns. Bump skiing is done with skis with quite little side cut. Still they carve. How is that possible? Yes, due to the different definition to "carving".

I can see how a WC SL ski wouldn't go into reverse camber in those bumps and allow you to actually carve a turn, but then I'm not sure what you're demonstrating.

The point I'm attempting to make in my comments about stance are that you must use different turn movements and the results on the snow surface are quite different from what the words are describing. I'm seeing a pivot and push of the skis to the side, not a smeared carve or a turn that uses the skis edges for most of the directional management. This is a fine way to use your skis if you'd like, but it doesn't look anything like the other QCT videos that have been posted in terms of the movements and mechanics of the turns. I think that a primary reason is the physics of a closed stance. If you like skiing that way, great, but realize that you are creating forces as a result that are counterproductive to what you are saying you would like to accomplish.

I played with turns like these in our wonderfully powdered-up bumps today. It was a powder day, so no video, but I certainly understand the idea of QCT as demonstrated in some of these other videos, especially cvj's. I'm simply trying to encourage you to think about how aspects of your turn mechanics are resulting in outcomes you may not want to have.

In the SVMM DVD they call them Swing Turns. I hope that cvj will post some segments that will help you understand his technique. Big push down (butt drops) on front of flexible boots to pressure ski that will create big rebound at bottom of turn.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssh 

The point I'm attempting to make in my comments about stance are that you must use different turn movements and the results on the snow surface are quite different from what the words are describing. I'm seeing a pivot and push of the skis to the side, not a smeared carve or a turn that uses the skis edges for most of the directional management. This is a fine way to use your skis if you'd like, but it doesn't look anything like the other QCT videos that have been posted in terms of the movements and mechanics of the turns. I think that a primary reason is the physics of a closed stance.

The wider stance does not make the skier quicker it takes longer to get the skis to work they cover more surface to make the turn. Skis together is quicker so skiing expert runs or mogul runs the stance with skis closer together works best. The wider stance works better on groomed or green and blue runs not black runs.......

When skiing moguls it is about how quick the skis come across the fall line. So this is why we tune our skis sharp with a .5 degree on the base and 1 on the edge with little or no dulling. This allows the ski to hook up with the tip biting immediately and not miss the spot the skier must turn so not to be late for the next turn. You can see this in nails video the skis bend and go where the tip goes resulting in a round or elliptical turn shape with ski going from the tip pressure to rocking off the tail.

Still believe that a skier can carve a short radius turn if the tail of the ski goes through the same plane as the tip. To me the wider stance is over rated as not even Bode Miller does not ski this way in all the turns.

When a skier pushes the tails out the tip of the skis never moves. The tips stay in one spot and the tail is moving back and forth right under the skier with no or little angulation to the side. This is also when the skier that push out the tails the skis hit the mogul more from the toe piece back. When the skier hits the mogul tip 1st then the ski loads up by bending and the turn has more energy in the ski so with tipping the ski more at this point the ski will make it's own turn with the skier dictating his own path.

Just watch where the skis hit the mogul.

The big difference between the "classic short turn" and the QCT is that the QCT enables the skier hold a tighter fall line with the chest floating directly down the fall line, and in order to hold this tight fall line, the skier must manage/harness the energy/momentum that quickly builds from turn to turn.  This makes the QCT so dynamic as the skis come across the fall line very quickly.

I really like how TDK6 keeps emphasizing how he "feels" his short turn differently now.  I know exactly what he is describing.  When the timing and edge angles are right, the skier will feel the explosive burst of built up energy at the turn finish as the skis finish the arc and come across the fall line and cross under, propelling the skier weightlessly into the next turn.  The skier experiences a powerful, controllable and very round sensation when the timing and movements align. 

Progress report on the QCT

Again, thanks to all those who’ve made many fab posts on this QCT thread, beginning with tdk6 for the videos that started the conversation, and Nailbender for his immediate followup analysis. In affect I’ve had a couple of level 3, private lessons for free.

I started yesterday’s "ski day" by reviewing the thread, and then took myself to Santa Fe, which was brutally cold but "fluffed" a bit with a few inches of ego powder (no float, but still nice). Because of the conditions, I skied my Gotamas rather than the AC30s. The Goats perhaps facilitated the training exercises, as the reverse camber makes foot steering a piece of cake. After a half-dozen runs or so, I took my version of the QCT onto a bump run (Thunderbird) with a short upper black diamond section and a much longer blue run.

The groomed runs were instructive and "by the book" in the thread. All aspects seemed in order in terms of feeling the float, the cross under, COM straight down the fall line, quick edge to edge, and so on. The one bugaboo remained speed control on the steep black groomed run known as "Muerte," where a true carved short radius turn (as distinct from the QCT) every few seconds was necessary.

I then made several bump runs. The blue bumps were almost effortless with the QCT, far easier than anything I’d been doing with linked short radius, carved turns. The black section of the bumps was smoother and easier in some ways, but speed control in the main still required some "serious" skids and turning back up the mountain on occasion.

I finished the day skiing the deeper powder (up to ten inches or so) that had been accumulated by the wind along the edges of two blue runs. My immediate impression is that the QCT works fabulously there, as well, and lets the skier stay in that little ribbon of powder rather than ski in and out with a longer radius turn.

My question now is "what is (or are) the missing factor(s), especially in regard to speed control?" Nail mentions the "smooth powerful boot drive/edge set at the turn finish" followed by the release of stored energy in the flexed ski (or "rebound at the turn finish/cross under to float into initiation of the next turn" as he puts the point) into the next QCT. He also mentioned the importance of reaching further downhill, which will – as he puts the point, "gain you more shovel pressure earlier on as you drive down the fall line" in steeper terrain.

Likely I need to work on all three of these and other variables. In truth, one thing this old man enjoys about the OCT as per my form yesterday is the relative ease of just floating down the fall line as compared to the energy required for linked, pure, carved short radius turns. Alas, the price for the ease is that my speed control is missing on the steeper terrain.

What am I missing? More practice and experimentation, for sure. But beyond that.

YOU ROCK! 

Seriously, after reading that post, I'm thinking Father Time himself must look down on you with envy.  Challenging Black Diamond runs, yet alone attempting to hold a tight fall line at 70?  That is a STATEMENT and I feel honored to be even considered for guidance.

I can just see the grin on your face as you hang in the thin ribbon of 10" fluff on the edge.  I'm assuming the QCT is a tighter turn than your used to consistently making, the more you practice it and experiment with variations of it, the more confident you'll use it in varied conditions/pitches.

Speed Control and how to gain it. 

Let me first suggest reading the "Mogul Skiing" thread if you haven't already.  Lots of very important and pertinent information there if you can wade your way through the pissing matches.  Pay special attention to the posts that discuss the  "Technical Line" and stuffing the tips,  also try to visualize the references to fore/aft movements/shin drive/boot drive at the turn finish.

I've never skied the Gotama or the AC 30.   It's funny, but a very good friend of mine that I learned to ski with has the same 2 ski quiver, but skis the Gotama almost exclusively, he's skied at Snowbird for the last 25 years.  Since I've never skied the "Goats", or a rockered ski yet, I'm not sure how the rockered tails brush at the bottom of the turn into the turn finish.  This is where a lot of speed control can be gained. 

It is important to complete or finish the turn in order to dump speed.  If you finish your turn to early, drive/pressure your feet slightly forward while on high edge angles to early, your skis may cross the fall line at let's say a 45 deg. angle to the fall line.  While this angle may have been sufficient to harness enough rebound energy to float you into the next turn transition, you may not have dumped enough speed/energy by completing the turn to early.  If you hang or delay the turn finish slightly, your skis my get to a 70 deg. angle to the fall line (skis at 90 deg. being perpendicular to the fall line).  This slight delay of the "sting" (boot drive/pole plant) at the end of the turn allows the ski tails time to slide/brush and dump speed.  This is what we describe as the sensation of a round turn, it almost feels like the skis are crossing the fall line at a 90 deg. angle when they cross under you.

When you reach the pole down the hill it will get the body further forward over the shovels, this will naturally allow the skier to put greater pressure on the shovel edges as the skis near the bottom of the turn, they really start to bite and come around.  As the skis start to come across the fall line, the skier wants to smoothly and firmly shift the pressure that has been focused on the shovel to the tail of the ski.  Fore/aft movement.  One way to facilitate this shift of pressure from the shovel to the tail is to close the ankles while slightly opening the knees, driving the boots slightly forward and rocks pressure to the heel.  If you need to dump speed, hang in the bottom of the turn longer.  Close the ankles slightly slower and open/extend the knees slightly slower, you'll feel the resistance.  This will allow you to hang or delay the turn finish slightly allowing your skis to get more across the fall line, all the while dumping speed/energy as your tails brush across the snow.

Remember, these subtle timing delays and intensity of movements can result in big changes to speed control and roundness/shape of the QCT.  Also try to remember the sensations you had making QCT's in the softer snow and try to reproduce them when it gets firmer, those are really the feelings you want to emulate when the snow gets harder.

BTW, if you could get any video, it would be great.  Bumps, groomed, crud, or powder, it doesn't matter.

Otd Think that speed control would be better if you work on the sink at the end of the turn. Sit on the mogul as you hit the up side for a slight pause between turns.

TDK6 Great video of some smooth zipper line skiing. Keep up the good work.

Video from P.J. more float from turn to turn .

This is what we do with more energy and more down the fall line. With more float between turns. The edge set and pole plant are simultaneous. More sink at the end of the turn or sit will help control speed feeling the tail of the ski for a split second. Using the back of the boot as a lever to get back to the front of the ski with help from the pole flick. General rule when skiing groomed pole plant to the tip of the ski, when skiing moguls plant the pole on the top of the mogul 1st.

I'd call both videos examples of clean short turns, not QCT's though, not quick enough.  Watch both skiers bodies cross back and forth across the fall line, this takes time. This is why the QCT is a more versatile turn and can be used in a wider variety of terrain.  It is easy to vary or slow down the movements/cadence of the QCT which will increase the turns radius and produce a turn very similar to HH's turn in the video which would probably be used in smoother natural terrain or crud skiing for example.  It's easier and more seamless to increase the QCT radius than to decrease the radius of the carved short turn.

I agree that HH's closer stance allows him to focus more energy/power at the turn finish which brings his skis across the fall line quicker. 

Much, much useful information coming my way. Many thanks for the brief notes as well as Nail's more extensive commentary. I'll work on the "gestalt" -- the total package -- this coming weekend. My mantra, especially, will be more pressure, more edge, finish the turn. The "downside" -- so to speak -- is that I anticipate a greater level of muscular effort. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow would be zipper line skiing in the black bumps: now that's a payoff.

At the moment I'm packing for Wolf Creek and some mondo powder bumps! The Wolf had 25" of new on Monday and Tuesday, and frigid temps since then that have kept the crowds way down. Unlike Alta, for example, fresh powder lasts for several days rather than hours at Wolf Creek.

Nail, thanks for the note on Father Time. I love the challenges inherent in acquiring new skills. I've worked out my entire life, including aerobics, stetching, and weight training. I suppose the basic premise here is use it or lose it. If I had all to do over I'd cut the thousands of miles I ran on pavement and stick to an elliptical trainer (which didn't exist way back when). I also crashed and burned too many times on mountain bike rides, with subsequent damage to my shoulders. But overall, despite some creaky joints, I'm hanging in there. Warren Miller says it all: on the day you ski you can see at least twenty more years ahead of you. The unstated conclusion: keep skiing.

Us active seniors like to say that "age is an attitude." That's mostly true. I'm strictly a half day skier now. I will not hike any distance for a bowl or a glade. And immediately after the ski day ends, I use some secret weapons (based on the premise that immediate replenishment is the key to tomorrow): refueling with low-salt V8 or tomato juice (very high potassium), a large Gatorade, a Cliff bar, and several creatine tabs. "Recreational beverages" come later.

RE. video: I'll ask one my buds to shoot some in a couple of weeks. Pride may keep on blue bumps, though.

RE. my quiver of skis: the choices were between a slightly softer ski (the AC30 and Gotama) and stiffer boards (the AC50 or Katana). Given my love of bumps, the goal of economy of effort, and the reality that I like to keep my speed inside of "the ragged edge," softer was preferable for me. At the moment, on days devoid of fresh, I prefer the AC30s (177mm). The Goats (186mm) are heavy, heaven on powder, and responsive on groomers, but no fun at the end of the day unless there's a foot rest.

Now where did I put my hot wax iron?

In the videos the mechanics are the same as for QCT. Just like nails says faster quicker and more in the fall line. Replenish with Chocklate milk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nailbender 

It is easy to vary or slow down the movements/cadence of the QCT which will increase the turns radius and produce a turn very similar to HH's turn in the video which would probably be used in smoother natural terrain or crud skiing for example.  It's easier and more seamless to increase the QCT radius than to decrease the radius of the carved short turn.

 

I agree that HH's closer stance allows him to focus more energy/power at the turn finish which brings his skis across the fall line quicker. 

There really isn't any similarity at all  between Harald's turns and the QCT.  The QCT doesn't seem to use the ski for anything more than to generate a platform to rebound off of.  Once the ski is light it is then pivotted or steered to another late hit edge set. 

When Harald skis bumps, the ski does all of the work.  As his skis come up the bump, he flexes and tips onto his new edges, pulling his feet back as he goes to keep snow contact.  He continues to increase his tipping angles while counteracting which brings the skis around quickly.  He gets his speed control from the turn itself, so there is no need for a hard edgeset at the bottom, nor does he have to stuff the tips.  In fact, he can release early because he gets most of his speed control done in the high C.  The rebound Harald gets comes from bending the ski throughout the entire turn, not by stomping on it at the end.  When Harald is really rocking it, you will sometimes see some ski deflection from the bumps, but at no time is he ever deliberately trying to turn by twisting his feet.

Harald's concept of the "float" is much different as well.  When his skis are light, he doesn't twist or pivot them.  He tips them.  The end result is that the edge change occurs on the same trajectory as the turn finish.  He is actually on his new edges before there is any directional change in his skiis.  Doing this is the only way you truly get a high C turn which is the key to controlling speed without any kind of a hard edge set.  In Harald's world, the float is all about giving yourself time to get organized for the new turn.  Get on your new edges, get balanced, and then let it rip.  The point of the float is to avoid going into the fall line until you are ready to be there.

The most important thing in recreational skiing is the feet.  Yes, if you don't know what you are looking for, I could see why somebody might think Harald and Joey's skiing is similar.  At the high level, they both look like very good skiers.  But if you focus on the feet and how they are getting from one set of edges to the other, there are vast differences in technique between them.  Harald's technique is about precision, efficiency and universal consistency.  Joey's technique is dynamic and requires athleticism.  Both are rippers, but in no way do they ski alike.

No one is twisting or forcing there feet around. Just because we use added pressure does not mean we do not tip the skis. Look at how much the skis are tipped or put on edge in stop motion. Every bit as much as HH or P.J.

Once again the end is the beginning and the beginning is the end. It happens in the previous turn. Getting high in the C that is.

Look again it is the same mechanics but as you say more dynamic and takes more energy but it is the same.

Watch there skis as they are tipped as much as possible but we don't let the ski come across the fall line as much as soon as the skis reach the fall line the turn is over go to the next turn. Be quicker with the movements that HH or P.J. are making.

IMO the difference is when the skis come across the transition and are flat. HH skis are coming through the transition for longer thus more across the fall line. Instead keep the skis more in the fall line at the transition with the skis going more down the hill not across.

Move the COM up or forward to the inside of the turn.

Sounds pretty much like running a flush in slalom to me.

Dakine Right on.

As in PJ video he states snow flying downhill. 

cvj, in the video you explain how you pressure the front of the ski by using soft flexing boots and a strong down motion at the end of the turn, you should post that clip to clear up the misunderstanding.

tdk, i think you are misunderstanding the QCT. it is a swing turn that ends in a hard edge check