or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Riding The Bend

post #1 of 70
Thread Starter 

In another thread, a discussion broke out about how the definition of carving is currently in the process being corrupted.  Its historic definition here in the US referred to a ski turn which involved no skidding.  The tails of the skis precisely follow in the track cut by the tips, and a thin line is left in the snow.  Today, some are promoting the idea that some intentional skid is permissible.  

 

This modification of the definition of carving makes communication more difficult.  Now, when someone talks about carving, we don't know if they're referring to the classic idea of clean arcing, or they're actually talking about a turn with some skid in it.  

 

In response, new qualifier terms are popping up to communicate that people are actually talking about carving in the traditional sense.  One of those is "Edge Locked Carving".  Seems like a good one.  It's pretty descriptive.  My only issue with it is that by using the "Edge Locked" qualifier it seems to legitimize the idea that different forms of carving do in fact exist.  I don't want to legitimize that concept, because I don't think this new broadened definition of carving is a healthy development.  

 

As such, I'm searching for a new term or expression to use when confusion breaks out during discussions, to help identify and separate classic carving from it's other recently adulterated forms . The term can't have the word "carving" in it at all, because that only endorses the new idea that there is more than one form of carving.    

 

The term "riding the sidecut" has been used, but that doesn't really cut it.  The sidecut of a ski only produces one shape turn: the maximum radius the ski can produce.  Quality carving provides for a spectrum of possible turn shapes.  Exploiting that spectrum involves tipping the ski higher on edge and bending the ski more, beyond the shape of it's sidecut.  The more you bend the ski, the sharper a turn you carve.  As such, I'm kind of liking the expression "RIDING THE BEND".  It would describe carving at a high skill level.  No matter how high you tipped your skis on edge, and how sharply you carved your turns, you'd still be "riding the bend".  

 

The following drawing provides a graphic portrayal of how carving makes a spectrum of turn shapes available to skiers.  Each of the infinite number of possible turn shapes within that spectrum involves "riding the bend".

 

shapeimage_17.png  

 

What do you think?  Do you like it?  Any other suggestions?  Let's talk it over, perhaps come up with other expressions/terms that might work better, and simultaneously get the message out that this new idea of broadening the definition of carving to include intentional skid is crapola. 

post #2 of 70

Either "riding the sidecut" or "riding the bend" sounds too much like "park and ride" to me. I'd like a term that implies something more dynamic. Also, they're both three words.

 

I'm fond of "arc" because it's short and simple and to my mind, it implies a pencilled arc drawn in the snow by a skier or boarder with the skill to lay it down. I'm an engineer. In my world, arcs are curved lines. But that's just me. YMMV.

 

However, like anything else simple and straigthforward, it is subject to misuse by those who don't really understand. It could (and certainly will be) argued that the so-called "brushed carve" is still an arc. But it leaves a vaguely crescent shape pattern in the snow. Nothing wrong with a crescent. But it's not an arc.

 

The key is that a thin line is left in the snow. Not a crescent. A line. An arc. Period.

 

Oh, well. You're fighting an uphill battle with this, anyway. People use language badly and are misunderstood with great regularity. They won't understand the new term any better than the old one, and they'll bend it (no pun intended) to their own uses.

post #3 of 70
Thread Starter 

I see your point, jhcooley.  The word "ride" does carry some negative connotations, courtesy of the "park and ride" phrase.  And the 3 words are a bit cumbersome.  I like Arc too.  It's clean and simple, and already a part of the sport's vernacular.  Just have to be careful with the fact it can be used in two forms.  The verb is what you do to produce the noun.  What's missing is the origin oft the arc.  I guess that's what I was trying to accomplish with the extra words.  A more detailed communication.  

 

I sure hear you about "bending" terms.  Carving has been used here to refer to a specific thing for as long as I've been skiing, which is now closing in on 50 years.  I see the current "bending" of that definition as a poor idea.  

post #4 of 70

I just looked at a "Quick Carved Turn" video yesterday. Clearly, the term carved can now be used to describe anything. I just take "arc" to mean carving these days and carving, well, I'm not sure what carving is anymore.

post #5 of 70

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

((.

.))

 

Isn't it that simple? If the tracks left in the snow aren't thin lines, then something other than carving is happening.

 

Perhaps the issue is that with skis that have a deep sidecut, a non-carved turn can be executed with very similar mechanics/movements to a carved turn... Another issue is perhaps that many seem to think that just because a turn is round, that it is also carved. Round turns may have carved components, but it is clear as day to see in the tracks when they aren't clean; thus not carved. I chalk these possibilities up to an uneducated skier. Rather than changing definitions to suit the uneducated, it would make more sense to educate... IMO.

 

post #6 of 70

I'm still holding on to the traditional definition of carving.  For me, there is no benefit (and no need) to re-define what is already a very clear concept.

 

In the context that I work in, the goal is usually to carve as much of a turn as possible for maximum performance.  There are reasons why a completely carved turn is not possible, and sometimes not advisable, but part of my performance analysis is a reflection on whether or not the turn was carved cleanly. 

 

Btw, l like the "Carve Zone" diagram.

post #7 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhcooley View Post

...

 

I'm fond of "arc" because it's short and simple and to my mind, it implies a pencilled arc drawn in the snow by a skier or boarder with the skill to lay it down. I'm an engineer. In my world, arcs are curved lines. But that's just me. YMMV....



For a very clean, "pure" carve on firm snow, this works.  But, it's a pretty broadly adopted usage that you can carve in 3d snow, just as for that matter you can carve on a surfboard.  In fact, the whole "unstable hooker" phrase was a way of capturing what it's like to be on a ski or board that ONLY wants to carve in 3d snow.  That's why to me it's really a matter of what is determining turn shape: primarily edge and based engagement causing a relatively radial/elliptical turn shape, or something else? 

 

The "QCT" thing is to me branding, nothing more.  The better skiers in their vids might be called carvers by other bumpers,  but that's a specialized use of the word.  It is good skiing, and there's nothing wrong with not always carving.  As noted in my parallel post in the other other thread, there's a reason why most of the descriptions of "pure" carving also carry negative connotations.  Riding the edge is a good example I hadn't thought of in the good/bad connotation category.

post #8 of 70

The term "carving" has been around a lot longer than the kind of skis that let anyone other than a strong downhill racer leave two pencil marks in the snow.  Rick's description is a long way from Horst Abraham's "using the ski design to turn with a minimum of skidding,"  or Bob Barnes's "turning with little lateral slippage." 

 

The aberration of carving skis and worship of twin ruts on corduroy has little to do with real skiing.

post #9 of 70

"Tracking it up"

 

That's my term for making lines on a fresh groom of cord.

 

Of course, my term for people falling and sliding all over the place is "Grooming"

 

 

post #10 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kneale Brownson View Post

... Horst Abraham's "using the ski design to turn with a minimum of skidding,"  ...



that's a good one...going back to the example of racers, depending on snow conditions, even for fairly round turns that basically everyone would call carved, they may or may not leave a clear cut, and sometimes the shovel will be bouncing around so much that any cut won't be that clean anyway.  That definition actually also works for activities as far removed as skateboarding, where carving turns particularly in bowls also is considered a good and fun thing, but not the end of the world either.

post #11 of 70

Another core issue which has not been addressed...is what about turns that start with a brush, and finish with pencil lines?th_dunno-1[1].gif

 

Again, on this site people only confuse or muddle definitions for their own benefit.  If you see it happening, chances are it is a good time to stop reading.

 

 

 

 

 

Incidently:

 

Traditional definition...from the Dictionary:

 

 

carv·ing

[kahr-ving] dictionary_questionbutton_default.gif Show IPA
–noun
1.
the act of fashioning or producing by cutting into or shaping solid material, as wood.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ie: is the turn created by cutting into the snow? or by skidding across it?  Cutting in=carving.  Not cutting in=skidding.  Most turns on a given day are a combination of both.

Edited by Skidude72 - 3/3/11 at 8:38pm
post #12 of 70

Real skiing?  As opposed to pretend skiing?  :) 

 

Maybe scarving is the word you are looking for?

post #13 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

I just looked at a "Quick Carved Turn" video yesterday. Clearly, the term carved can now be used to describe anything. I just take "arc" to mean carving these days and carving, well, I'm not sure what carving is anymore.


it wouldnt even fall into my definition of carving.

 

Arcing = edging and balance movements create just enough pressure at the right time and there are 2 lines with no lateral displacement. Rotary is present but not in guiding way, just a let guided way.

 

Carving = edging and balance movements are the primary means of turning but active rotary movements are present, the tail still follows the tip. Nail's turns dont fall under this definition.

 

post #14 of 70

Its not that we need a different way to describe carving.  Its that people need to accept they aren't.  They need to come up with a word that describes what they are doing (scarve, schmarve etc.) and leave carving alone.  If someone thinks carving involves anything other than tail follows path of tip leaving a thin line in the snow, they have the definition wrong and should be corrected.

 

This is no different than distinguishing between stopping and slowing down in the old joke:

 

Guy gets pulled over for rolling through a stop sign.  He argues with the cop that he slowed down enough to continue on safely.  Cop says "But you didn't stop."  Guy says "Stop. Slow down.  What's the difference?"  Cop pulls the guy half way through the drivers window and starts beating his head with his baton and says "Do you want me to Stop or Slow Down."

 

You're either carving or you aren't.

 

Not carving isn't bad and "mostly" carving might be what is required in current conditions.  Just because moves/techniques are being blended doesn't mean definitions need to be.

 

I like the Carve Zone picture.

 

Ken

 

 

post #15 of 70

As Kneale wrote- the term "carving" has been around much longer than the ability to create the lines we are so used to seeing on the snow these days!

 

Even before 'shaped' skis, we referred to any such thin lines as "pure carved", whereas any turn could still be considered "carved" if it had the minimum amount of lateral slippage or skidding for that specific turn.

 

Otherwise, you could never refer to a turn radius shorter than the NTR of the ski as a "carved" turn.

post #16 of 70

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by L&AirC View Post

Its not that we need a different way to describe carving.  Its that people need to accept they aren't.  They need to come up with a word that describes what they are doing (scarve, schmarve etc.) and leave carving alone.  If someone thinks carving involves anything other than tail follows path of tip leaving a thin line in the snow, they have the definition wrong and should be corrected.

 

This is no different than distinguishing between stopping and slowing down in the old joke:

 

Guy gets pulled over for rolling through a stop sign.  He argues with the cop that he slowed down enough to continue on safely.  Cop says "But you didn't stop."  Guy says "Stop. Slow down.  What's the difference?"  Cop pulls the guy half way through the drivers window and starts beating his head with his baton and says "Do you want me to Stop or Slow Down."

 

You're either carving or you aren't.

 

Not carving isn't bad and "mostly" carving might be what is required in current conditions.  Just because moves/techniques are being blended doesn't mean definitions need to be.

 

I like the Carve Zone picture.

 

Ken

 

 


+1 icon14.gif
 

 

post #17 of 70
Thread Starter 

 

I'm glad everyone seems to be on board in opposition to the bastardization of the CARVING term.  Lets all actively work to nip this silly trend in the bud now, so we don't have to deal with even bigger confusion issues down the road.    

 

I think this is an excellent theme for our crusade:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by L&AirC View Post

 

You're either carving or you aren't.

 

 

 

 



 

post #18 of 70

So for a brushed carve turn, should just the carve be removed like in brushed turn or should another term be inserted?

 

What would be a more correct tern for the turn by some called QCT? 

post #19 of 70



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

 

I think this is an excellent theme for our crusade:

 



 Let me be the first to get on the band wagon.

 

New signature \/

 

post #20 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

Another core issue which has not been addressed...is what about turns that start with a brush, and finish with pencil lines?th_dunno-1[1].gif

 



Part of the turn is carved, part isn't.  Apply a suitably descriptive term to this as you see fit, but there's no need to change the definition of carving.

 

post #21 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

 

I'm glad everyone seems to be on board in opposition to the bastardization of the CARVING term.  Lets all actively work to nip this silly trend in the bud now, so we don't have to deal with even bigger confusion issues down the road.    

 

I think this is an excellent theme for our crusade:

 



 


Count me in.

 

post #22 of 70

How about Bending the Ride instead of Riding the Bend?th_dunno-1[1].gif

post #23 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhcooley View Post

Either "riding the sidecut" or "riding the bend" sounds too much like "park and ride" to me.

 


Don't you have to Pose and Go before you can Park and Ride?

post #24 of 70

No crusade, just reinforcing the bullworks and circling the wagons on what clearly already exists.

 

Loved this L&AirC

Quote:

Guy gets pulled over for rolling through a stop sign.  He argues with the cop that he slowed down enough to continue on safely.  Cop says "But you didn't stop."  Guy says "Stop. Slow down.  What's the difference?"  Cop pulls the guy half way through the drivers window and starts beating his head with his baton and says "Do you want me to Stop or Slow Down."

 

You're either carving or you aren't. 

Count me in for sure (as if you couldn't tell from my other posts).

 

 

That said, here is a spectrum of turns and, yes, I left a little wiggle room at the end for fat twin lines in the snow versus thin lines.

 

 

going sideways   going straight      
100%   0%   downhill sideslip  
90%   10%   forward sideslip  
80%   20%   slippy  
70%   30%   sliddy  
60%   40%   slewed  
50%   50%   Skivy turn  
40%   60%   skarvy  
30%   70%   smarved  
20%   80%   sliced  
10%   90%   scarved  
2%   98%   carved thick rairoad tracks
0%   100%   pure carved thin railroad tracks 

 

Cast in snow so please feel free to embellish. 

post #25 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by L&AirC View Post

This is no different than distinguishing between stopping and slowing down in the old joke:

 

Guy gets pulled over for rolling through a stop sign.  He argues with the cop that he slowed down enough to continue on safely.  Cop says "But you didn't stop."  Guy says "Stop. Slow down.  What's the difference?"  Cop pulls the guy half way through the drivers window and starts beating his head with his baton and says "Do you want me to Stop or Slow Down."

 

You're either carving or you aren't.

 

Yep.....you got my vote.....
 

 

post #26 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk View Post

No crusade, just reinforcing the bullworks and circling the wagons on what clearly already exists.

 

Loved this L&AirC

Count me in for sure (as if you couldn't tell from my other posts).

 

 

That said, here is a spectrum of turns and, yes, I left a little wiggle room at the end for fat twin lines in the snow versus thin lines.

 

 

going sideways   going straight      
100%   0%   downhill sideslip  
90%   10%   forward sideslip  
80%   20%   slippy  
70%   30%   sliddy  
60%   40%   slewed  
50%   50%   Skivy turn  
40%   60%   skarvy  
30%   70%   smarved  
20%   80%   sliced  
10%   90%   scarved  
2%   98%   carved thick rairoad tracks
0%   100%   pure carved thin railroad tracks 

 

Cast in snow so please feel free to embellish. 


In a different thread over the summer, I remember writing that there is a hockey stop on one end of the spectrum and a (pure) carved turn on the other.  Everything else is just a combination of those two.  I had a similar chart in mind.  

 

In my chart, I pictured the "going sideways" column as "ski tail" and "going straint" as "ski tip".

 


 

 

 

post #27 of 70

Rick, I think what you are trying to address is the desire of people to say their turns are "more carved" because carving is perceived as being such a desirable capability.  In fact, it is the pillar defining the end of the spectrum.  If we think of skidding as being all those turns on the slipping side of 50/50 ie. those going more sideways then what do we call all those on the carving side of 50/50 ie going more forward that are not carved?

BTW, I tend to think about this as a horizontal spectrum with slipping on the left and carving on the right but I am not good enough to draw that.

 

What about using the term slicing?

 

So back to carving.

The difficult part is describing what someone is doing in your "no carve zones" when the skier is doing all the correct movements of a carve (and the tails are following the tips as best as they possibly can given the turn dynamics and snow conditions).  Are they leaving two distinct lines in the snow - maybe, are they smeared throughout the turn - probably - are they carving - I would say so.  So IMhO, to say it is two thin lines in the snow is easy but is not suffcient to describe the activity of carving turns.  So I don't think they are truely "no carve" zones.

 

On another note:

I asked my fellow instructors this AM what the radius number on their skis meant (triggered by this post of yours).  Unfortunately I did not have your diagram.  But WOW!  A spectrum of answers with a majority describing something about the ski being on edge and how quick it could turn.  Discussions even got a bit passionate.  Drawings on paper and cutting out shaped skis all got used in the dsicussion.  A few described it as the radius of the cut in the side of the ski when it is flat but skepticism prevaled on that.  Not one mentioned it as being the largest carved turn the ski could make. 

 

So thank you for helping generate discussion and lo ...........for some.........learning (to include me!).

 

Cheers!

post #28 of 70
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk View Post

Rick, I think what you are trying to address is the desire of people to say their turns are "more carved" because carving is perceived as being such a desirable capability.  In fact, it is the pillar defining the end of the spectrum. 

 

 

 


Exactly, Showhawk.   As well as to address instructors willingness/attempts to authenticate student's turns as carved, when they in fact are not.  

 

 

 

 

 

Quote:

If we think of skidding as being all those turns on the slipping side of 50/50 ie. those going more sideways then what do we call all those on the carving side of 50/50 ie going more forward that are not carved?

 

 

I call all turns that are not being carved "steered" turns, regardless of how much skidding component they contain.  I differentiate steered turns by the size of the skid angle.

 

skid%20angle.jpg

http://www.yourskicoach.com/SkiGlossary/Skid_Angle.html  (a full explanation of what skid angle is can be found at this link)

 

A skid angle can be so small that it's virtually undetectable with the eye, or in the track, yet it can clearly be felt by the skier, and used to sharpen the turn, or manage speed, or both.  Even when that small, it's not carving, and a skier who can execute it with precision knows that.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote:
What about using the term slicing?

 

As a way of describing what true carving is, I think it's a good one.  Just to be clear, in starting this thread I was not looking for words to substitute for the term "carving".  The term "CARVING" has been around for decades, and it works just fine, no need to change it, or what it means.  The extra terms we're discussing here are just tools to use to help people who've been confused by the current attempts to paint carving as something it's not to understand what it really is.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

So back to carving.

The difficult part is describing what someone is doing in your "no carve zones" 

 

It's fairly straight forward.  Beyond the short radius boundary of the carve zone they are steering.  That steering can be with various skid angles.  The more skid angle they're using, the slower they're traveling.  Beyond the long radius boundary of the carve zone they are reverse steering.  In other words, steering away from the direction of the turn.  In essence, resisting their edged ski's desire to turn.  Within the carve zone, they can be carving or steering, and if steering it can be of various skid angles.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

On another note:

I asked my fellow instructors this AM what the radius number on their skis meant (triggered by this post of yours).  Unfortunately I did not have your diagram.  But WOW!  A spectrum of answers with a majority describing something about the ski being on edge and how quick it could turn.  Discussions even got a bit passionate.  Drawings on paper and cutting out shaped skis all got used in the dsicussion.  A few described it as the radius of the cut in the side of the ski when it is flat but skepticism prevaled on that.  Not one mentioned it as being the largest carved turn the ski could make. 

 

Cool, bet that was a fun discussion.  VailSnoPro keeps a flexible mini ski (about a foot long) with him for such discussions.  I keep a plastic room key (credit card like) with me that I've cut out a simulated sidecut on one side.  Here's another drawing that might help if you get into it again with them.  Feel free to copy any of these drawings to take with you to one of your pow wows, or to show to students.  Just right click on them, open them in a new window, and print.

 

shapeimage_19.png

 

 

and here's a link that gives a more detailed explanation of ski radius and turning radius:  http://www.yourskicoach.com/SkiGlossary/Radius.html

 

Hopefully, those resources will clear up any questions.  The radius of the ski, and the radius of the turn are different critters.  A 12 meter radius ski can make carved turns much smaller than 12 meters, by increasing edge angle, but it can not make a carved turn any larger than 12 meters.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:

So thank you for helping generate discussion and lo ...........for some.........learning (to include me!).

 

Cheers!

 

 

I'm glad you've found value in it.  If considering, thinking and learning takes place, I consider the time well spent.  

post #29 of 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk View PostSo back to carving.

The difficult part is describing what someone is doing in your "no carve zones" when the skier is doing all the correct movements of a carve (and the tails are following the tips as best as they possibly can given the turn dynamics and snow conditions).  Are they leaving two distinct lines in the snow - maybe, are they smeared throughout the turn - probably - are they carving - I would say so. 



I would say not, and that's the point; the tried and true definition of carving would say not as well, and it is being eroded by people who would say it is carving when it clearly is not carving by the old definition.  If the tracks left behind in the snow are smeared, then you are clearly spreading the butter and not slicing the bread, tearing the bread maybe.  Call it tearing it up if you like, but it's not carving.

post #30 of 70

So, if it's not "Carving", what is it then?

 

Is any form of carving, not carving?

 

Does carving have to be perfectly performed to be carving?

 

When is carving not carving?

 

see, it's all a matter of speculation. Certainly no one performs perfect carves down 2000 verticle feet of run every time. Not even the best of the best do.

 

there are so many instances during a ski run when you will have to brake or change lines due to obstacles or other skiers, moguls, trees etc where you will have to brake from the carve to steer, skid or even use a hockey stop braking or slow down motion.

 

so, if true carving is not present when is something less, still carving? And at what point can it be perceived as "hacking" as BB likes to say.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching