Originally Posted by Nailbender
Doc, I think our misunderstanding stems from the difference in what each of us considers "inside" or "outside".
I consider and I believe most others do also that when making a left turn, if the knees are further left than the feet/bindings, the knees would be considered to "inside" of the turn and the feet, closer to the center point of the radius/arc, not "outside".
I agree if you consider relative to the turn
. But my comments are about knees relative to both the hips and the feet, not relative to the turn
In the youtube screenshot, the knees are farther to the viewers right than the feet and also to the viewers right of the hips.
This is often a hallmark of "mogul turns" - the angulation is driven more by the knees. In a more typical turn finish the feet
are one side of the knees and the hips are on the other. Knee angulation can (and should) be used as soon as the bindings
clear the frontside of the mogul. (Dolphin turns can help focus on the knee drive)
I am not sure what you mean when you say the knees "deflect laterally", sure the knees are moving laterally, but the knees are following the path of the arc along with the feet/tips/tails because this is a natural movement when turning/carving. The knees cross under the body at the turn finish. The knees don't just "deflect laterally" because the shovels hit the mogul face, they were already traveling in that direction regardless of the terrain.
It seems we are agreeing here more than disagreeing. I was making the point this this lateral path of the knees allows a
greater range of motion and greater absorbtion, ie by the knees getting to the outside while the hips largely stay over the
feet the skier can "swallow" a larger mogul
The bottom third of the turn would be the location you are describing when you wrote:
Do you disagree that the bottom 1/3 of the turn is when Shane engages the face of the mogul sidewall with his tips and finishes the turn as his binding toe piece crests the top edge of the mogul side wall?
No, i dont disagree
I totally agree that it is much smoother to absorb the transition from one rut to the other when making round turns and deflecting as the shovels lineally transfer load through the body as opposed to laterally absorbing the impact when the bindings laterally hit the bottom of the rut and mogul sidewall.
You used the phrase "during frontside absorbing".
You make it sound like "frontside absorbing" is a phase of the turn, it is not. The skier is concentrating on finishing the turn and absorbs the frontside transition in the process of deflecting off the mogul sidewall.
This is exactly what I've been harping about as far as WC judging in man made mogul contests go.
The difference in path widths you talk about revolves totally around the pivot/slip/skid that most competitors rely on. A pivot/slip/skid should NEVER score more than a 2.5 or less because it is NOT a carved turn in any way. It is a pure pivot and can easily been seen by watching the difference in paths that you describe, the feet/tips/tails.
The tips, tails and feet should ALL be following the SAME path/arc as seen in Shanes skiing, he is carving/edging and linking "round turns".
I totally disagree. The pivot/slip/skid IS the technique these competitors rely on. They have NO intention of driving/deflecting their tips off the mogul sidewall, or linking any type of turn or arcs through the course. With the advent of the "perfect" man made mogul coarse, these competitors/teams have regressed to refining the very stable and physically demanding pivot/slip/skid, which is an intermediate turn IMO.
I agree this is what is seen on the competition course. So here is my question:
Which should be faster:
a) pivot, slip, slam, repeat <which few enjoy watching)
b) a more direct path? (ie a path as shown in the you tube video)
I would think b) should be faster, so i question why we see so much of a) in competitions
There are a few competitors on the WC that actually load the edges and turn, Collas and Shane for example. It can be done, it requires a highly developed skill level to execute though and most competitors simply don't have the skills to carry speed and turn down the course. The judges don't help progress the sport either and are also incredibly inadequate, they cant' tell the difference between a pivot/slip/skid and a deflected carved turn. It's sad really.
I added the bolding to your text. I blame it on the course, you blame on lack of ability. Either way it translates to this:
Many WC bumpers cant "ski like Shane" at the speed they would develop in the course.
I went to the link that you left at the bottom.
I did agree with some of it, but had to laugh at this part which is typical of mogul skiing instruction that is available. What was the point of the link anyways?
The point was the emphasis on knee angulation in the moguls; this goes all the way back to screenshot: knees relative to feet and hips
I had to type it out because it wouldn't copy/paste.
The author commends the skill of "flattening the ski in the middle of the turn". LOL
I took this to mean a slight slipping of the skis to continue down the hill,
then re-engagement of the edges to continue the curved arc. (A tiny stivot?)
How the author links knee angulation with flattening the skis in the middle of the turn is just beyond me.
I don't think I've ever gotten off my edges and flattened my ski intentionally mid turn to avoid a rock or fit the trough. If anything, I'll increase edge pressure to finish my turn above the obstacle or defy the tough/terrain.
This would work too. Flattening would allow you turn "under"
Pivot/slip/skid and align the skis to fit the trough and slam it for speed control. I'd say that pretty much sums it up. Do you agree?
I agree there is too much of it. And the winter park video is the type of mogul skiing i enjoy