Originally Posted by tdk6
Yes it does show A-frame. But it also shows that the skier is very outside ski oriented in that particular moment. He is tipping his outside ski on edge at that moment by rotating his femure and pressing his knee into the turn. The inside leg is flexing but remains fearly passive. He problably doesent want his inside ski to hook up its LTE and his outside ski provides him with sufficient edge hold. All this talk about parallell shins has fooled people into thinking that A-frame is a very bad thing but in ski racing the speeds and the edge angles are so high and big that the skiers are not able to keep their shins parallell. They also need to react in micro seconds and dont have time to rely on gravity to increase their edge angles. And they do not want to shift any weight or pressure to the inside ski. Its a way of keeping the pressure on the outside ski especially at the end of the turn, driving that knee.
They are also not aggressively canted. I notissed myself that when I increased my canting my A-frame whent away when free skiing on soft snow but at the same time skiing a high speed well prepared and rock hard racing course became much more difficlut not to say impossible. The thing is that on racing courses you can tip your ski on edge much further than you can on a soft gromer even if it appears to be very hard and firm. Expert skiing is one thing, ski racing is annother. Its not always usefull to try to model after wc skiing.
Everything not crossed out is what we agree on. Everything crossed out is supposition on your part and while some of it has a basis in sound mechanics you offer so many erroneous conclusions based on faulty logic and assumptions. Garbage in, garbage out....
Let's start with the statements about a passive inside leg, It's working independent of the outside leg but that can hardly be called passive. Yes Bode is predominantly balancing on the outside ski but the inside ski is being used as a second point of contact and as such creating a larger contact patch or platform of sustination (haven't used that term in decades).
Next we have the whole supposition that he doesn't want the inside ski to hook up, really? The simple fact that it is creating spray suggests he is using that outside edge more than you suggest. That's the problem with guessing about his intent instead of simply saying he is balancing mostly on his outside ski.
Then we have the idea that the unequal edge angles are mostly caused by the speed and high edge angles. Well the part about using the knee to create a higher edge angle is valid but that doesn't mean much when it comes to how Bode is using the inside leg. So drawing a conclusion based on the edge angles is a bit of a stretch. As you can see below knee angulation is not limited to just the highly inclined part of the turn (high edge angles). Barnes is free skiing and using an a frame through the transition to create additional outside ski edge angle.
So is Cochran in the following montage. I would add that both are great examples of the definition of an A frame Skier Dude mentioned and neither are the product of the high edge angles we would see at the apex of their turns. The move isn't limited to when a skier, or racer are at high edge angles.
As far as using body movements to create edge angles well we all do that but I find it curious how you think Gravity alone could create edge angles. IMO this is just another mistake in one of your theories.
The idea of maintaining pressure on the outside ski is true to a point but again the second point of contact is still being used as a balance aid and therefore must carry some weight / pressure. The statement that they (racers) always avoid adding additional pressure to the inside ski, especially at the end of the turn is an overstatement though. I remember a recent thread where a very well respected race coach posted a comment about Raich shifting weight uphill to raise his line. That's why all these overstatements and absolutes need to be avoided TDK. Simply stated a racer (just like a free skier) will use a variety of moves to accomplish their goals. Even if that violates an idealistic and dogmatic mantra like never shifting weight to the inside ski.
All the stuff about minimal canting is also curious considering even from an early age most of our racers have alignment work done. It might be as simple as custom footbeds but maybe Master Racer and Sharp edges could shed more light on boot work and how prevalent it is on the WC. I suspect it's more prevalent that you claim TDK. The fact that you had trouble with a different set up and returned to one you felt more comfortable using is interesting and quite common. It can hardly be offered as proof of what most WC racers do, or don't do though. Nor can we draw any significant conclusion about Bode's A frame (in that original photo) based on his boot set up. The few degrees involved simply wouldn't explain the fifteen to twenty degree difference in edge and shin angles we see in the photo.
While I agree that on some level racing and free skiing are different situations, beyond the obvious differences in speed and RoM both still occur under the same sun where the physical and mechanical principles don't change. There's a lot more in common between the race and free skiing world than there is different. The use of race photos certainly can be confusing to some who lose sight of that limited context, especially when they use a photo out of context. That's exactly why I keep objecting to the suggestion we should do so in this thread.
Finally, I want to point out you're also having trouble with SD (in another thread) where he has also questioned the veracity of your opinions, and your erroneous versions of ski history. Compare your post # 2 to SD's post #3 in this thread TDK, his post doesn't include all the suppositions,assumptions, and erroneous history lessons. If you drop them from your posts you would make more sense and be of more value to the folks we're trying to help. That's why I choose to take you to task, you're misleading those folks and yourself. It also suggests you don't understand the subject matter as well as you claim.