EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Skidding Sucks. Rant: Physics, Rockers, and Hard Snow (Ice).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skidding Sucks. Rant: Physics, Rockers, and Hard Snow (Ice).

post #1 of 187
10/14/11 at 12:46pm
Thread Starter 

Did I go to sleep last night and wake up today to find that the laws of physics and how they relate to skiing have changed?

 

In Universal Ski Techniques George Twardokens (Dr T.) illustrates and explains the difference in edge hold between a skier and ice skater. In sum, due to the fact the skater's edge is directly under the center of the skater's foot, the skater can get to the edge quickly with minimal angles and maximum force interaction of the ice and edge. Conversely a skier, whose edge is located outside the base of the foot, must create greater angles to tilt the ski to a point where the edge gets more in line with the center of the foot to achieve comparable force. The skier is slower to get to the edge and has to move more to do so. In other articles Dr. T explained the benefits of binding risers plates and how they, while lifting the skiers foot up from the ski, allowed the skier to achieve a greater edge angle with less edging movement compared to a non-lifted binding. While this again made getting to the edge slower, it became generally considered that if you had shape ski, you needed a lifter kit for your bindings.

 

So with everyone talking "Rocker", we have now skis wider than ever underfoot. The physics say that the wider the ski, the more movement needed to get to the edge, the slower that movement will be, and with less force. Am I missing something here? We already have thousands of skiers who can't effective edge a ski that is 65mm underfoot and now we have have equipment that averages 75mm? Has getting the ski on an early edge at the top of the turn gone the way of the 8 Track?

 

How do you stand at the top of Ovation or Super Star at Killington after a January rain/freeze, at the top of a freshly groomed East Bowl at Heavenly or Cornice Bowl at Mammoth with skis that wide underfoot and think "I am going to slice this up with my Rocker!"?

 

To make matters worse, I just read Mike Porter's detailed "All Rocker Isn't Created Equal" article in the latest 32 Degrees. Great piece. Fantastic charts. Yet one very disturbing thing jumped out at me under the "Ice" section:

"Traditional camber gives you the largest ski surface for edge grip and power, and allows the tip to engage to create edge from initiation." - Okay so far.

" Early rise makes the turn initiation easier, which can create more consistent linked turns, allowing better control." - Still okay.

"However , it dies promote steering to initiate, which limits initial edge grip." - Not so good.

"Tip-to-tail rocker allows for a more pivoted or skidded arc." - WHAT?!?!?

 

I know he is referring to "Tip to tail rocker" but, seriously, since when is pivoting to an edge set on "Ice" acceptable? Ask any ski professional who has been working with long term clients, that is EXACTLY what they have been trying to eliminate from the student's skiing. The last thing I want to see is a "skidded arc."

 

Skidding is not the NEW carving.

 

Skidding sucks.

 

Sadly, with this new evolution is ski design and its marketing to the masses, it is evident we are going to see more of it.

Reply
post #2 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:08pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUVRoadRage View Post
Has getting the ski on an early edge at the top of the turn gone the way of the 8 Track?

 

Why bother getting the ski on an early edge at the top of the turn in order to flex the ski into an arc,  if the arc is already permanently formed into the ski underfoot?

Reply
post #3 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:47pm

Please tell me this thread is a joke or a troll... It is almost 2012...

Reply
post #4 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUVRoadRage View Post

Did I go to sleep last night and wake up today to find that the laws of physics and how they relate to skiing have changed?

 

In Universal Ski Techniques George Twardokens (Dr T.) illustrates and explains the difference in edge hold between a skier and ice skater. In sum, due to the fact the skater's edge is directly under the center of the skater's foot, the skater can get to the edge quickly with minimal angles and maximum force interaction of the ice and edge. Conversely a skier, whose edge is located outside the base of the foot, must create greater angles to tilt the ski to a point where the edge gets more in line with the center of the foot to achieve comparable force. The skier is slower to get to the edge and has to move more to do so. In other articles Dr. T explained the benefits of binding risers plates and how they, while lifting the skiers foot up from the ski, allowed the skier to achieve a greater edge angle with less edging movement compared to a non-lifted binding. While this again made getting to the edge slower, it became generally considered that if you had shape ski, you needed a lifter kit for your bindings.

 

So with everyone talking "Rocker", we have now skis wider than ever underfoot. The physics say that the wider the ski, the more movement needed to get to the edge, the slower that movement will be, and with less force. Am I missing something here? We already have thousands of skiers who can't effective edge a ski that is 65mm underfoot and now we have have equipment that averages 75mm? Has getting the ski on an early edge at the top of the turn gone the way of the 8 Track?

 

How do you stand at the top of Ovation or Super Star at Killington after a January rain/freeze, at the top of a freshly groomed East Bowl at Heavenly or Cornice Bowl at Mammoth with skis that wide underfoot and think "I am going to slice this up with my Rocker!"?

 

To make matters worse, I just read Mike Porter's detailed "All Rocker Isn't Created Equal" article in the latest 32 Degrees. Great piece. Fantastic charts. Yet one very disturbing thing jumped out at me under the "Ice" section:

"Traditional camber gives you the largest ski surface for edge grip and power, and allows the tip to engage to create edge from initiation." - Okay so far.

" Early rise makes the turn initiation easier, which can create more consistent linked turns, allowing better control." - Still okay.

"However , it dies promote steering to initiate, which limits initial edge grip." - Not so good.

"Tip-to-tail rocker allows for a more pivoted or skidded arc." - WHAT?!?!?

 

I know he is referring to "Tip to tail rocker" but, seriously, since when is pivoting to an edge set on "Ice" acceptable? Ask any ski professional who has been working with long term clients, that is EXACTLY what they have been trying to eliminate from the student's skiing. The last thing I want to see is a "skidded arc."

 

Skidding is not the NEW carving.

 

Skidding sucks.

 

Sadly, with this new evolution is ski design and its marketing to the masses, it is evident we are going to see more of it.

Not saying REQUIRES. Also are we just talking about wide open groomed surfaces, or are we talking about terrain that different kinds of movements are useful in?

 

Carving is only one aspect. If your goal is to carve groomers all day then get a carver, but don't try and tell me what's fun and what isn't because your locked into one paradigm.
 

 

Reply
post #5 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 It is almost 2012...



Yes, but other than the Maya problem, what exactly does it  _mean_ to be in 2012?  Instead of 2007 say.

Reply
post #6 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:52pm

If that's how you feel, buy skis with traditional camber. Heck, buy skinny race skis. They'll still work just like they used to.

 

But you live in California. I've never seen real ice in CA, and only once in a while seen something I'd call boilerplate.

Reply
post #7 of 187
10/14/11 at 1:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUVRoadRage View Post

 

How do you stand at the top of Ovation or Super Star at Killington after a January rain/freeze, at the top of a freshly groomed East Bowl at Heavenly or Cornice Bowl at Mammoth with skis that wide underfoot and think "I am going to slice this up with my Rocker!"?

 

 

You should be standing up at the top there thinking "I brought the wrong skis!"

 

On icy or groomer days grab your cambered skis, not your rockered skis.  On pow days grab your rockered fatties.  On mixed days bring more than one set of skis with you to the mountain.


Edited by Toecutter - 10/14/11 at 2:25pm
Reply
post #8 of 187
10/14/11 at 2:14pm

That whole rant you only talk about one facet of free skiing, and a lesser important facet out west at that, IMO. And the skis you dis are not the skis for the conditions you espouse. Life on the mountain is not a race course. If you don't want to see a "skidded arc", don't go to the new ski films, man, it's butter and slarve on coast, with some fooling around in the back seat goin' down.

 

There are an infinite number of ways to change speed and direction; we probably use half a dozen turn types and shapes every run. Start enjoying a few more techniques than race inspired carving. Then see how worried you are about turn initiation and pressure on your edges. Heck,  for the last few years I've been working on softer edges so as not to tighten everything up. 

 

And the average ski may be exceeding 78mm by now. But I expect to see you out there on steep, firm pitches with perfectly race-tuned ultra-stiff carvers and 150 boots with lift plates. Otherwise, you're a hypocrite, as in not using the technology that is available to dive into a turn and set an edge.

 

Would a troll do such extensive research?? The man is READING a lot about skiing. (The authors sound like real sticks in the mud, I'm sorry. In free skiing, does it really matter if you get to your edge in .75 seconds or .42 seconds?  And whereas a racer can edge like that for about 90 seconds at a time, is it really fun to try to do it all day?)

 

anti- rant rant over. it's all just a mind game in October.


Edited by davluri - 10/14/11 at 7:42pm
Reply
post #9 of 187
10/14/11 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

Please tell me this thread is a joke or a troll... It is almost 2012...


Gets my vote. 

Reply
post #10 of 187
10/14/11 at 3:45pm

Hmmmm.... a one-post Troll, but I'll bite on a couple of things.

 

First, a book on ski technique that is 16 years old (Universal Ski Techniques) has limited relevance to modern technique on either cambered or rockered skis, even though the physics of a turn are universal.  Nuff said.

 

Second, somebody must have failed physics if they think adding a riser (lengthening the effective lever arm) means a ski can be edged faster and with less movement (a common misperception about risers).  The opposite is true.  Although a riser allows greater edge angles to be achieved (by preventing 'boot-out'), and greater leverage to be applied against the ski, it actually requires greater movement through the arc to achieve the same edge angle (that's what provides the greater leverage effect).  When a lever is longer, more movement is required through the arc but the result is greater leverage with which to lift something or, in this case, leverage applied against the ski and the forces affecting it.  The converse of achieving greater leverage is that edging response is slower due to the greater movement required to achieve the edge angle.

 

Okay..... that's as much time as I'm going to waste right now.


Edited by exracer - 10/14/11 at 4:04pm
Reply
post #11 of 187
10/14/11 at 4:28pm

Take your head out of the instructional books and go spend some time on actual snow and once you learn how to ski in real life try getting on some fatty rockers and go ski some powder. Of course, being an occasional once in a while "expert" skier and cranky about anything new then you won't try it. I'm sure if you actually do it will shut you up.

Reply
post #12 of 187
10/14/11 at 5:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SUVRoadRage View Post

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

 

hard snow and ice sucks.

 

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH



 

FIFY

 

Why would I much care about how a ski performs on icy/groomed/hardpack slopes.....I avoid groomed if possible and icy hardpack almost always.  If all I got to ski or even mostly ski was hardpack.....I wouldn't care about what skis were like because I'd quit skiing

Reply
post #13 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:17pm

Been meaning to post this accusation for a long time... People on Fats have thrown out Phase 1 of the turn. Fat skiers are now stuck in intermediate hell...

But not to worry- 95 %  of skiers are stuck there too.  Most think that getting their butt in over late the fall line is real skiing and that The New Fat skis can actually carve.

A ski season is not all gnar-pow. Hell, most runs are not pow - but a only a pitch or two, followed by skiing with hands in the pockets and poles stuck out at 90 degrees ... Boring. 

Phase 1 is the most interesting part of a turn; and so; the most interesting part of skiing in any meaningful sense... That of developing big edge angles before the fall-line and dragging your inside hand waiting for the hook-up and knowing yer gonna get one because the skis you're on are designed for hook-up. Skis that carve mean that 40mph is just a given every time you click in and any so-so run is a blast.  Knee-deep on GS boards... lets rock.   Waist-deep on a mild Slalom ski is cool too.  Few understand this stuff and this goes for instructors who lay-off and over-steer because they are in the 'profession'.

Reply
post #14 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:32pm

You guys are right, skiing sucks. rolleyes.gif


Edited by tromano - 10/14/11 at 7:56pm
Reply
post #15 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:37pm

Ski base that is not touching snow, length or width is counter productive. Horse for courses. 

Reply
post #16 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:44pm

I always wonder how the carvemeisters and racers have any time to ski when they are so busy shitting  on the minutiae of everyone else's technique, and gear choice.

 

I have never started a chairlift conversation with anyone over how skinny or short a ski they are on. I just accept that they are happy, and I'm happy, and we're both probably stoked  to be enjoying a day skiing.

 

Reply
post #17 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:53pm



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUVRoadRage View Post

Did I go to sleep last night and wake up today to find that the laws of physics and how they relate to skiing have changed?

 

In Universal Ski Techniques George Twardokens (Dr T.) illustrates and explains the difference in edge hold between a skier and ice skater. In sum, due to the fact the skater's edge is directly under the center of the skater's foot, the skater can get to the edge quickly with minimal angles and maximum force interaction of the ice and edge. Conversely a skier, whose edge is located outside the base of the foot, must create greater angles to tilt the ski to a point where the edge gets more in line with the center of the foot to achieve comparable force. The skier is slower to get to the edge and has to move more to do so. In other articles Dr. T explained the benefits of binding risers plates and how they, while lifting the skiers foot up from the ski, allowed the skier to achieve a greater edge angle with less edging movement compared to a non-lifted binding. While this again made getting to the edge slower, it became generally considered that if you had shape ski, you needed a lifter kit for your bindings.

 

So with everyone talking "Rocker", we have now skis wider than ever underfoot. The physics say that the wider the ski, the more movement needed to get to the edge, the slower that movement will be, and with less force. Am I missing something here? We already have thousands of skiers who can't effective edge a ski that is 65mm underfoot and now we have have equipment that averages 75mm? Has getting the ski on an early edge at the top of the turn gone the way of the 8 Track?

 

How do you stand at the top of Ovation or Super Star at Killington after a January rain/freeze, at the top of a freshly groomed East Bowl at Heavenly or Cornice Bowl at Mammoth with skis that wide underfoot and think "I am going to slice this up with my Rocker!"?

 

To make matters worse, I just read Mike Porter's detailed "All Rocker Isn't Created Equal" article in the latest 32 Degrees. Great piece. Fantastic charts. Yet one very disturbing thing jumped out at me under the "Ice" section:

"Traditional camber gives you the largest ski surface for edge grip and power, and allows the tip to engage to create edge from initiation." - Okay so far.

" Early rise makes the turn initiation easier, which can create more consistent linked turns, allowing better control." - Still okay.

"However , it dies promote steering to initiate, which limits initial edge grip." - Not so good.

"Tip-to-tail rocker allows for a more pivoted or skidded arc." - WHAT?!?!?

 

I know he is referring to "Tip to tail rocker" but, seriously, since when is pivoting to an edge set on "Ice" acceptable? Ask any ski professional who has been working with long term clients, that is EXACTLY what they have been trying to eliminate from the student's skiing. The last thing I want to see is a "skidded arc."

 

Skidding is not the NEW carving.

 

Skidding sucks.

 

Sadly, with this new evolution is ski design and its marketing to the masses, it is evident we are going to see more of it.



Well you are right...but about 10 years late.  Where have you been?

 

Yes the goal was to improve skier performance (many assimilated this to carving), most skiers, even with modern carving skis couldnt do it.  "Park and Ride" was the best most could achieve, which is pretty lame, so they gave up and became "free-skiers" and pursued backcountry and powder.  Of course they couldnt ski that either, but at least it was private and no one laughed at them.   Then of course a few guys would could actually ski, high performance carving types took their skills backcountry, this was often seen in ski movies.  Guys like Scott Schmidt (national level racer) and Glen Plake (WC unconventional bumper) started a movement.  Skis starting being developed for this type of skiing, and the boundaries of what was possible kept getting pushed out, again still by the guys who could actually ski, the high performance guys who had the skills and training the "wanna bees" knock, eg of a guy who has awesome skiing skills, and used them backcoutnry to define new limits of what is possible is Seth Morrison (USST hopeful, never made it but was close, 8 years racing with Vail Ski Club, that is where he developed the skills that enable to ski the way he does, skills that the wannabe dont beleive are important).  Of course these fat skis made it easier for the "wanna-bes" too, so they came in droves, "hey I can ski a black run now, and black is expert, therego, I am an expert! This is great!"  Of course they are fooling themselves, of course they are missing out on what skiing can really be about....you think getting down a steep powder filled run is fun?  Try actually skiing down a steep powder filled run!  Sure if you are "getting down" with skis on your feet, you are "skiing", but there is skiing, and then there is skiing!  I am sure most understand what I am trying to say.

 

Sure fat skis are great...but most use them as a crutch to enable them to get down terrain they otherwise couldnt.  Very few use them to achieve a level of off-piste performance that was not considered possible 10 years ago.

 


Edited by Skidude72 - 10/14/11 at 8:14pm
Reply
post #18 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:54pm
Quote:

Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

 

I just accept that they are happy, and I'm happy, and we're both probably stoked  to be enjoying a day skiing.


See that's where you are wrong as this thread so aptly shows.

Reply
post #19 of 187
10/14/11 at 7:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

See that's where you are wrong as this thread so aptly shows.



Are you saying they aren't happy?

Reply
post #20 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

Are you saying they aren't happy?

 

It sure looks that way. This thread is about how 95% of skiers suck and can't even buy a turn lead by wannabes like seth morrison..

 

Reply
post #21 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:09pm

This bait deserves a nibble.

 

You are missing something, the type of snow or ice

 

You have done enough reading and research to show that you may be interested enough to step your model up one level.  Think it through.  How a ski really behaves on the snow and ice depends as much on the snow as it does on the ski.  At one end of the range we have very hard snow or ice that the ski can barely etch; on the other hand we have 30 feet of soft snow.

 

If you are skiing on ice, the surface of which your ski can only scratch, then it is very much as you have described with an ice skater moving his blade to the side of the foot.  Only the edge and a small portion of the base engages the snow.  In order to get that ski on edge, you have to lever it up,  and all the wider is not better arguments apply.

 

However if you are skiing on soft snow, you have to look at the base of the ski as a whole.  The snow takes the load from the base of the ski and it spreads it out as it transfers it to the earth below.  Various soil mechanics models spread load out at an angle, and it can get unnecessarily complex; just understand that the compressed snow under the middle of the ski can and does take more load than the snow at the edges.  If you look at the pressure on the bottom of the ski, on the base, it will have a maximum at the centre-line of the base when running straight, just like the normal ice-skaters skate blade.  When you put the ski on edge, you don't have to lift it, one side lifts and the other goes down into the snow.  Just like one side of a skate would lift and the other come closer to the ice.  You are in effect rolling around the base of support that you create under your ski. 

 

The reality is better modelled by a continuum between the two above models.  What matters is not the unstressed shape of the ski in the shop, but the shape and stress-strain relationship of the loaded ski on (and in) the snow.  You can use a wide rockered ski to get by with poor technique, and to make it easier to skid, but there is no law that says you have to.   There is also no law that says smearing turns is illegal.  I do think some people don't know what they are missing though. 

 

Season won't start here until mid December.   Lot's of time to waste on trolls.

Reply
post #22 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post

I always wonder how the carvemeisters and racers have any time to ski when they are so busy shitting on the minutiae of everyone else's technique, and gear choice.

 

I have never started a chairlift conversation with anyone over how skinny or short a ski they are on.

 

 

 

I am not really sure what you are saying here.  First racers and carvemiesters that I know never focus or shit on others technique, they focus on their own.  Big difference.  So do the skiers you see in the ski movies.  Sure the ski movies guys dont tell you that, they like the "Bad Boy - I am just so awesome I just show up and do this" image, but it is not reality.  Back in the day when racing was big, it had its bad boys too, who made the same claims.  I remember there was actually an Ad I think Rossignol featurning Alberto Tomba (the best ski racer in the world at the time), and the caption was somthing of the effect "4 easy steps to be a world champion, drink wine, dance, next day win WC race, repeat."  And it showed a picture of Alberto in a stylish suit, and two hot women on his arm.  Of course this was BS, everyone knew Alberto was one of the hardest training atheletes out there....(although he did slack off later in his career when he deiced to just relax and enjoy the fame and the benefits that came with it, but he was already a world champion at this point)

 

 

Second, I find your reference to gear puzzling.  Are you implying the fat ski crowd doesnt obsesses over skis?  The guys who proudly talk about their "quiver"?  Are you serious here?  Ever read a thread where people ask for ski advice?  Ever read the absolute barrage that is hammered on anyone who suggests anything under 110mm?????  At this isnt even TGR! 

 

 

Reply
post #23 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:12pm



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

 

It sure looks that way. This thread is about how 95% of skiers suck and can't even buy a turn lead by wannabes like seth morrison..

 



Ok...maybe bad grammer by me, I will go fix.  Seth Morrison in my view is the greatest skier ever.  He is the guy the wanna-bes want to be like.  Hell I wanna-be like him too! It wasnt his lack of skill that kept him off the USST, it was his size.  He is a little dude.  Like most sports at the top levels, size matters in ski racing for a whole host of reasons.

 

Reply
post #24 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

 

Ok...maybe bad grammer by me, I will go fix.  Seth Morrison in my view is the greatest skier ever.  He is the guy the wanna-bes want to be like.  Hell I wanna-be like him too! 

 


No problem.

 

The feeling is mutual.

Reply
post #25 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

 

 

I am not really sure what you are saying here.  First racers and carvemiesters that I know never focus or shit on others technique, they focus on their own.  Big difference.  So do the skiers you see in the ski movies.  Sure the ski movies guys dont tell you that, they like the "Bad Boy - I am just so awesome I just show up and do this" image, but it is not reality.  Back in the day when racing was big, it had its bad boys too, who made the same claims.  I remember there was actually an Ad I think Rossignol featurning Alberto Tomba (the best ski racer in the world at the time), and the caption was somthing of the effect "4 easy steps to be a world champion, drink wine, dance, next day win WC race, repeat."  And it showed a picture of Alberto in a stylish suit, and two hot women on his arm.  Of course this was BS, everyone knew Alberto was one of the hardest training atheletes out there....(although he did slack off later in his career when he deiced to just relax and enjoy the fame and the benefits that came with it, but he was already a world champion at this point)

 

 

Second, I find your reference to gear puzzling.  Are you implying the fat ski crowd doesnt obsesses over skis?  The guys who proudly talk about their "quiver"?  Are you serious here?  Ever read a thread where people ask for ski advice?  Ever read the absolute barrage that is hammered on anyone who suggests anything under 110mm?????  At this isnt even TGR! 

 

 

I'm saying that you never see threads started complaining about skinny fully cambered ski's.
 

 

Reply
post #26 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:29pm


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

Well you are right...but about 10 years late.  Where have you been?

 

Yes the goal was to improve skier performance (many assimilated this to carving), most skiers, even with modern carving skis couldnt do it.  "Park and Ride" was the best most could achieve, which is pretty lame, so they gave up and became "free-skiers" and pursued backcountry and powder.  Of course they couldnt ski that either, but at least it was private and no one laughed at them.   Then of course a few guys would could actually ski, high performance carving types took their skills backcountry, this was often seen in ski movies.  Guys like Scott Schmidt (national level racer) and Glen Plake (WC unconventional bumper) started a movement.  Skis starting being developed for this type of skiing, and the boundaries of what was possible kept getting pushed out, again still by the guys who could actually ski, the high performance guys who had the skills and training the "wanna bees" knock, eg Seth Morrison (USST hopeful, never made it but was close, 8 years racing with Vail Ski Club).  Of course these fat skis made it easier for the "wanna-bes" too, so they came in droves, "hey I can ski a black run now, and black is expert, therego, I am an expert! This is great!"  Of course they are fooling themselves, of course they are missing out on what skiing can really be about....you think getting down a steep powder filled run is fun?  Try actually skiing down a steep powder filled run!  Sure if you are "getting down" with skis on your feet, you are "skiing", but there is skiing, and then there is skiing!  I am sure most understand what I am trying to say.

 

Sure fat skis are great...but most use them as a crutch to enable them to get down terrain they otherwise couldnt.  Very few use them to achieve a level of off-piste performance that was not considered possible 10 years ago.

 



Indeed. Clearly it is worth rewatching this top level racer show how it should be done

 

 

In contrast to this fat ski using free skier type schlub

 

 

biggrin.gif

Reply
post #27 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:35pm

 

Quote:

Hell, most runs are not pow - but a only a pitch or two, followed by skiing with hands in the pockets

 

Really? You must either get out once in a blue moon when you can, or ski at a really crappy hill.

Reply
post #28 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

Indeed. Clearly it is worth rewatching this top level racer show how it should be done

 

 

In contrast to this fat ski using free skier type schlub

 

 

biggrin.gif



ROTF.gif

 

 

Thank you for making my point:  You have been around here long enough to know if you are going to slam, me.  Do your homework!

 

 

http://mpora.com/skiing/tag/kaj-zackrisson/

 

Here it is in his own words:rolleyes.gif

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxKZmhtpFc4

 

Kaj represents the type of skier that I was referrign to: no not the wannabe....the highly skilled skier, wanted to make Swedish National Ski Team, (mother was on the team!) the one who then takes those skills (those same skills the wannabes beleive are not important) adds modern high tech specialist gear, guts and redefines what is possible.

 

yahoo.gifbiggrin.gif

yahoo.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

biggrin.gif

yahoo.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

biggrin.gif

yahoo.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif

biggrin.gif

yahoo.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gifbiggrin.gif


Edited by Skidude72 - 10/14/11 at 9:30pm
Reply
post #29 of 187
10/14/11 at 8:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by g-force View Post
Hell, most runs are not pow - but a only a pitch or two, followed by skiing with hands in the pockets and poles stuck out at 90 degrees 


Hunhh???  That was most definitely not my experience last winter.  665" of snow last season, face shots all winter long.  Where do you ski?

Reply
post #30 of 187
10/14/11 at 10:51pm

I like powder.  Powder is good.  Rocker rocks, especially in powder.

 

/ End Thread.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Skidding Sucks. Rant: Physics, Rockers, and Hard Snow (Ice).