An interesting can of worms: This season I taught someone who we'll call Berta. On groomed green runs, Berta could ski parallel, balanced well fore-aft and laterally. We eliminated most of Berta's shoulder rotation, and turns were being created through turning of the lower joints and mild tipping movements. Great! Midday, after the lesson we went for some freeskiing, and I noticed that Berta could somehow keep up with me even on blue or black terrain when I was carving rounded turns. The next run I had a chance to glance behind me, and I realized that Berta was basically linking braked sideslips down the mountain.
And so a big question has come to mind: if an individual can "ski" any run and is "happy" with how they ski, what is the value-add for them in taking a lesson?
The reasons I see for people to take lessons are:
- To improve their balance, enabling them to ski steeper terrain or ski more confidently on current terrain
- To look like someone on TV
- Intrinsic motivation (appreciation for the feeling of bettering oneself)
- A desperation move to get out of a rut (for those attempting to self-teach)
We also know there are some motivators which people may not yet be aware of, such as enabling new sensations like rebound, or weightlessness during transition versus big compression during turns, or being airborne during jumps.
But if the client is happy with linking sideslips... none of these motivators may apply...
Do some people simply not have the inclination to improve? Do you see this situation as something to be "remedied", or just as a simple fact? It's quite a brain bender for me!