or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Where is neutral?

Where is Neutral?

First, what is neutral for this discussion.

Neutral, in my mind, is where you are standing on a flat slope (oxymoron right?) in an athletic stance (another one?).

Rotary neutral – no tip lead, tips are square and knees, hips, shoulders hands are all square and parallel to the tips.

Edging neutral – the skis are flat.

Pressure neutral – equal leg lengths and equal pressure on both feet.

Here is a turn diagram.

SO for each of these, where does neutral occur in the turn and where does maximum appear?

Now the reason I ask it that discussions on these forums have led me to believe that they occur at the following places in the turn.

Neutral    Maximum

Edging       0 - 1            4

Rotary        0 - 1            4

Pressure    0 - 1            4

However, in a recent Central Division education event, the clinician asked where in the turn we should have equal tip lead or what I have termed rotary neutral.

The answer was at position 3 using a pivit slip as one example.

The edging and pressure answers were 0 neutral and 3 maximum.

Apparently, the high end racers are practicing getting their tips equal at the apex of the turn now? We then did some excercises to "push" the outside leg out and "pull" / "keep" the inside ankle in at the top of the turn in order to make this happen followed by telemark turns.

I would like to get peoples thoughts on these two apparent differing thoughts on where we should be trying for equal tip lead in the turn. The edging and pressure ones seem pretty close but I am struggling to reconcile the rotary difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk

Where is Neutral?

First, what is neutral for this discussion.

Neutral, in my mind, is where you are standing on a flat slope (oxymoron right?) in an athletic stance (another one?).

Rotary neutral – no tip lead, tips are square and knees, hips, shoulders hands are all square and parallel to the tips.

Edging neutral – the skis are flat.

Pressure neutral – equal leg lengths and equal pressure on both feet.

Here is a turn diagram.

SO for each of these, where does neutral occur in the turn and where does maximum appear?

Now the reason I ask it that discussions on these forums have led me to believe that they occur at the following places in the turn.

Neutral    Maximum

Edging       0 - 1            4

Rotary        0 - 1            4

Pressure    0 - 1            4

However, in a recent Central Division education event, the clinician asked where in the turn we should have equal tip lead or what I have termed rotary neutral.

The answer was at position 3 using a pivit slip as one example.

The edging and pressure answers were 0 neutral and 3 maximum.

Apparently, the high end racers are practicing getting their tips equal at the apex of the turn now? We then did some excercises to "push" the outside leg out and "pull" / "keep" the inside ankle in at the top of the turn in order to make this happen followed by telemark turns.

I would like to get peoples thoughts on these two apparent differing thoughts on where we should be trying for equal tip lead in the turn. The edging and pressure ones seem pretty close but I am struggling to reconcile the rotary difference.

min

rotary(by your diffention) - 2ish tends to change no real clear answer but closest to 2.

edging - 0

pressure - 0

Max aka furtherest away from neatrul per you definitions

Rotary  - 5 ish tend to change again no real clear cut answer

edging - 3

Pressure - 3-4

Neutral should be where the edges release. Note that this is not where the skis are flat on the slope. That spot occurs on the way to engagement of the new edges.

Equal leg length should occur where the skis are flat on the surface. Weight should be mostly equal then, and pressure/lead change starts to occur immediately after.

I love the Bob Barnes illustrations at http://www.epicski.com/t/7969/those-turns-illustrated

Bush....PA,

Per my definitions of neutral, I tend to think that point 0 is not when the skis are flat on the snow.  I am perpendicular to gravity but not to the snow/slope.

I tend to think of point 0 as the "traverse" point.  My feet are not in the same plane here - one leg is a bit longer than the other.  For some, this is the end of the turn and they can hang out here before they start the next turn.  The neutral I think about is slightly after that when the skis are flat on the snow and the legs are of equal length.  This is not a place you can hang out.

But regardless, I find equal tip lead at the fall line to be hard to envision much less do.

Kneale,

I did not want to use BB's pictures because the answers are shown there - or at least one set of answers.  Yeah, I love them and in fact showed them to the Examiner.  His first question was how old they were.  Then he showed me that equal tip lead should be at point 8 & 16 in BB's and point 3 in mine.  He felt the diagrams did not reflect current skiing.

So I am still trying to reconcile his answer to BB's diagrams for equal tip lead and what I think I have heard on these forums (and shown in BB's diagrams and your response).

Yeah, I understand the thought of neutral being when the edges release.  However, by my definition, I am asking for when they are flat.  I find the former to much more difficult to envision and think about because that point can vary alot based upon slope, snow conditions, speed, etc.  The skis flat on the snow is pretty easy for this simple mind and I can go back and see it in the snow too.  The thing I like about the flat to the snow is that you cannot stop there.  It is a dynamic point in a turn that is continuous motion - not that the release point isn't either but.....

Snowhawk, neutral and a symmetrical stance get confused a lot. Perhaps a car analogy would help. Shifting from gear to gear includes moving the shifter through neutral. We can shift very fast like a race car driver might, or we can shift at a more leisurely pace like a regular person might. So what is neutral in a car? Isn't it when the gears in the transmission are not engaged? To bring that back to skiing, the edges are the gears here and when they are not engaged you are in neutral. A symmetrical stance and skis flat to the snow is a more specific and narrower interpretation but not always an accurate one since it's really more about the edge engagement, or lack of it.

As far as rotary neutral, we call that being square to the skis. Personaly I don't see the need to use the word neutral to describe that because it means I have to write that new definition down to explain it to the reader. So it doesn't save me any keystrokes or work. If it works for you great.

As far as pressure neutral, well IMO it's so much easier to say equal pressure / or if you prefer equal weight, on both ski. That can occur at will at any point during a turn. Where it occurs naturally might be easier to identify but it varies for different turn types.

Edited by justanotherskipro - 1/28/12 at 12:15am

JASP,

Yeah, neutral is not a good description - skis flat to the snow is certainly clearer and more specific.  I agree on the pressure one as well.  It could occur anywhere if we so choose so maybe that is better described as when we have equal leg lengths.

OK, forget the term neutral.  It has led this thread into it's definition and while that can be useful and informative it is not the crux of my question.  I should have left it out and just defined my criteria and ask when they occur.

The question is:

Where in the turn should my ski tips be even?

I am assuming that at this point, I am square to the skis - shoulders, hips, knees parallel to equal tips.  But I am open to suggestions that even tips and square are not the same thing and can occur at different points in a turn with a when and why this is a good (or bad) thing.

One camp seems to think this should be slightly after the start of the new turn (position 0 - 1 in my diagram) when the skis are flat to the snow.

Another camp seems to think this should occur at the apex of the turn (position 3 in my diagram).  Clearly, in a pivit slip, this is when our skis are directly in the fall line (position 3 in my diagram). Should we be trying to be square at the fall line in dynamic parallel turns as camp 2 seems to be thinking?

If so, why not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk

Where in the turn should my ski tips be even?

Should we be trying to be square at the fall line in dynamic parallel turns ...?

The should-ness of these questions pulls answers more from personal preference in technique than from inherent turn mechanics.

If a person is making short radius turns it's likely the tips will align at a different portion of the turn than if they're making a longer radius turn. If they're implementing a very active weight transfer that point will likely be very early in a turn (to enable proper fore/aft balance) while a skier implementing a passive weight transfer will show tip alignment much later in the turn (because they don't need that outside foot under them quite so soon).

A person who believes they must keep their upper-body facing the direction they're traveling (tangent to that point in the turn) will probably be pulling the inside ski back forcefully much of the time and may show even ski tips throughout much of the turn.

From a pure mechanical/biomechanical perspective I think tip-lead 'should' be about even when weight is about even across both skis because this is the moment the skier can stand on either ski without going into the back seat (assuming both feet are under them). As tip-lead causes one ski to progress forward, the skier needs to increase support on the trailing foot since that's the one under them.

Mechanically, I don't see any other reason than Base-of-Support placement to worry about where tip-lead changes. Biomechanically, we're stuck with a number of constraints (range of motion, leg-length, strength in a given position, etc) which encourages a change in tip-lead - but at no point encourages "even tips" - which to me is a happenstance transitional moment rather than a point of positional usefulness when linking turns.

For me, tip-lead occurs somewhere after the cusp between turns, but before new-edge engagement. The actual location hovers somewhere around when my skis go 'flat' against whatever slope-angle exists at that point. Exactly where this is (in terms of degrees of turn) I'm not sure, and suspect it varies a bit.

.ma

Tough reading guys, very tough and I have good reading comprehension.  Other than a split second in my good turns truly neutral only occurs when tipping my elbo in the bar. Sorry, just thought this way to serious discussion cried out for a little levity.,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowhawk

JASP,

Should we be trying to be square at the fall line in dynamic parallel turns as camp 2 seems to be thinking?

If so, why not?

We should be ALLOWING squaring up to occur, not thinking about making it occur, in dynamic skiing. There's no time to think about or make this happen. It just has to happen for a very brief moment, and, depending upon how you're initiating, how far your feet are going outside the line of your torso, speed, pitch, ski design, etc., it may be barely noticeable.

While one perspective of turn neutral is the classic "skis flat on the snow"  There is another turn neutral interpretation championed by Bob Barnes where the skier ends one turn in a body position which permits the skier to begin a new turn or simple traverse.  It is the point where we can choose to release the edges to begin a new turn or not release and traverse.  It is a point where turning powers neutralized.

On the subject of feet being side by side in the fall line, I am still scratching my head here?  How or Why would we want this to occur?  Possibly the clinician was making a point for pulling the inside ski back and this was his task for the students to use as a reference?  Pulling the inside foot back slightly throughout the turn keeps the front of that ski working and loaded but taking it too far has negative affects.

I would think keeping the feet side by side could be easily accomplished at slower speeds as the natural tip lead is not that extreme because of the relationship between perpendicular to the slope and the inclination of the skier.  Conversely, in a dynamic turn the relationship of our increased inclination to the the slope requires more tip lead from a simple bio-mechanical requirement and would preclude the ability or benefit of keeping the feet side by side to the fall line.  I would caution taking this one "tip" out of context.

All good points guys.  However, no one seems to be saying that this point (snapshot instant) of square should be at or around the fall line - or am I missing it?  OK, in pivit slips but...

Skiing is smooth, progressive, continuous motion of all the skills, edging, rotary, pressure and of course balance, so I am certainly not suggesting this is a "position" we assume.

However, video allows us to capture these instances.  So do our eyes.

That's great but if we do not have some "reference" of that instant in good skiing we have no basis for evaluation.  The "instant" allows us to know where we are vs where "good" skiers are at that same instance.  All of us have this base reference model and instructors more so than anyone else.  Whether they are the same or not is what these forums are all about, aren't they?  So I am just trying to develop/refine my own reference model.  In this case, trying to reconcile two differing views of when in a turn we might see equal tip lead in good skiing.  Yes, I know "it depends" but we can say that about almost everything.  So in this case, what did equal tip lead in the fall line depend upon?  Why would I want to do that?

Sorry, I am probably way overthinking this.  This is a flyer outside my reference model but I suspect it is an opportunity for learning.

Perhaps I have it all wrong and that the attempt to get equal tip lead in the fall line is an exercise to help develop something earlier in the turn or set us up for later in the turn.

If so, what might that be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

While one perspective of turn neutral is the classic "skis flat on the snow"  There is another turn neutral interpretation championed by Bob Barnes where the skier ends one turn in a body position which permits the skier to begin a new turn or simple traverse.  It is the point where we can choose to release the edges to begin a new turn or not release and traverse.  It is a point where turning powers neutralized.

On the subject of feet being side by side in the fall line, I am still scratching my head here?  How or Why would we want this to occur?  Possibly the clinician was making a point for pulling the inside ski back and this was his task for the students to use as a reference?  Pulling the inside foot back slightly throughout the turn keeps the front of that ski working and loaded but taking it too far has negative affects.

I would think keeping the feet side by side could be easily accomplished at slower speeds as the natural tip lead is not that extreme because of the relationship between perpendicular to the slope and the inclination of the skier.  Conversely, in a dynamic turn the relationship of our increased inclination to the the slope requires more tip lead from a simple bio-mechanical requirement and would preclude the ability or benefit of keeping the feet side by side to the fall line.  I would caution taking this one "tip" out of context.

Bud, I agree on all points.

What got me was this came across to me as a flat statement vs a "tip" or an excercise.  The words included "this is what racers are beginning to do in their summer race camps".  We then did the exercises to try to make that happen.  Hence the same scratching of my head on it.

I understand BB's definition of neutral but I find that for me, a different "window" to think about passing through works better for me.  It is what I think JASP called "symmetrical stance".  I am of the same belief as BB seems to be in that there is "one" point where we have a square stance (equal tip lead, no counter), skis flat to the slope and equal leg lengths.  It is slightly after the mid-point of the turn (0 - 1 in my picture).  When I pass through that window/position/stance/whatever it is magic!  Hence, this 3 o'clock thing threw me.  So I am trying it on for size and seeing how it fits.

So I tried skiing this today while I was warming up, skiing different shapes and at different speeds and I noticed a few things I'll put out there.

First, looking at your tips to see when they are even in relation to the turn and body position... Bad idea! I haven't felt that gummed up in awhile.

There was never a time when my ski tips were even and my hips and shoulders were square to those even tips.

When I did catch a glimpse of my tips they became even for brief moment after edge change high up in the turn. Some where around your 1 in the diagram. At the point that my tips where even I had already moved past equal leg length and was beginning to direct energy to the outside ski.

I relation ship to the body, my new inside hip (now inside my skis) was beginning to move forward to get me set for the next turn. The skis where still heading out towards the apex of their turn and rotation was just starting to come into effect. By moving from one inside half to the other it was my natural body position that was causing the tip lead to change and so that was why I say they were only briefly even.

I hope this makes sense.

As for the pivot slip. You are right that your tips, hips, and shoulders would all be even when you are facing down the fall line, but I find that as you had shaping moving drill into skiing this never happens again.

Nate, makes perfect sense to me.  You are also describing some of the finer points around when this all occurs.  Glad you didn't run off the side of the slope while you were checking all this out!

When you were moving from one inside half to the other I am betting that as your hips faced the tips that the tips were also even?

Perhaps more importantly, you did not say that any of this occurs at the fall line.  It all happens pretty high up in the turn.  Even pressure, as you and JASP point out, seems to be a more variable point based upon other factors (intent, turn shape, speed, slope, etc., never mind skill).

Thanks for joining in!

Cheers!

Yes!  good post Nate!  If we understand why we have tip lead it is easier to understand why side by side feet at the fall line doesn't make much sense?  The only real time that our feet would be side by side in the fall line would be when we are standing pretty perpendicular to the fall line which would coincide with pivot slips or straight running.  This is because there are no turning forces in either case so we remain perpendicular to the fall line.  As soon as we begin to create turn shape we create turning forces and consequently our center of mass moves inside the turn to some degree which creates tip lead.  Remember, the more we increase the angle between the snow surface and the CoM the more tip lead created.  Though we can certainly pull the inside foot back a bit to keep pressure on the forebody of the ski,  we can not eliminate it and ski functionally well at higher speeds.

Snowhawk, I get that you want to develop a "mental picture" of good skiing, but this discussion is surreal and bizarre.

If I had to sum it up?  Isn't there a tv show, "American Horror" ? That'll do.  Frankly, I have to give props to Bushwacker for not loosing it here and railing.

"Neutral, in my mind, is where you are standing on a flat slope (oxymoron right?) in an athletic stance (another one?)."

So there's been some discussion of this one, it's a common interpretation, but most, when told of "critical edge angle" -talked about above, get it and use it.  It is a very valuable concept, honestly probably the most valuable and one that can make the most difference in your skiing.  Everyone above has posted about this, but you state:

Quote:

Yeah, I understand the thought of neutral being when the edges release.  However, by my definition, I am asking for when they are flat.  I find the former to much more difficult to envision and think about because that point can vary alot based upon slope, snow conditions, speed, etc.  The skis flat on the snow is pretty easy for this simple mind and I can go back and see it in the snow too.  The thing I like about the flat to the snow is that you cannot stop there.  It is a dynamic point in a turn that is continuous motion - not that the release point isn't either but.....

-Snowhawk

Ok, this is where you have taken the reigns of lead script writer for the horror show. You can insist on this, but you are now constructing mental images of a ski turn, and this gives you almost zero access to actually making that ski turn.  When the skis are flat is a moment that is in between other actions.  On any slope with a little pitch, you will pass right through it without doing anything.  It is a result.  The important moment, is getting to critical edge angle - "neutral" as a result of the previous turn.  If you start the new turn before this, you will have to do something - twist, push, lift etc. to start the new turn.  The important thing is that you can feel this moment, and you can have it as a goal of the turn - ski into neutral.  I guarantee if you do that, you will have a breakthrough in your skiing.

You can also do it at very slow speeds, on flat terrain, and feel it.  In fact looking for neutral makes slow skiing interesting.

Look at your statement- "I can go back and see it [skis flat on snow] too" .  Who cares?  The turn is done.  While looking at tracks is valuable to see what was going on, I see little value in your seeing where the flat spot was.  What are you going to do with that info? You state that you can "envision" flat to the snow more easily.  That's understandable, but that is at the crux of the problem. When you are actually making a turn, on snow, on a slope, the inputs you have to direct your actions are from your body, most notably your feet.  If you aren't using that information as your primary means to taking action, but are basing things on some mental image about when to do things, you will always be behind the curve - literally and figuratively.

I'm not saying that you don't use mental imagery about where you are in a turn, etc. - that's valuable, but if you don't use the information that's coming from your skis through your feet, the body has little basis of how to move in real time.  Where the mental imagery can come in is taking the inputs from the feet and then moving before you get to the point you know is coming.

Your brain can process inputs far faster than thinking about a movie of a turn, figuring out what to do, then sending that information to the feet/body.

Imagery is really for the line you want to take - ahead of you, and what you might have to do to accomplish it. Experience with how that feels is what leads to expert skiing.

Thiinking skis "flat to the surface" has it's place. Besides in speed events like downhill,  most notably a rail, -there you really do want to think about flat!, also at times the walls of a half pipe, and the landing of a jump.  But we're not talking about those.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowhawk

Where is Neutral?

First, what is neutral for this discussion.

Neutral, in my mind, is where you are standing on a flat slope (oxymoron right?) in an athletic stance (another one?).

Rotary neutral – no tip lead, tips are square and knees, hips, shoulders hands are all square and parallel to the tips.

Edging neutral – the skis are flat.

Pressure neutral – equal leg lengths and equal pressure on both feet.

Here is a turn diagram.

SO for each of these, where does neutral occur in the turn and where does maximum appear?

Now the reason I ask it that discussions on these forums have led me to believe that they occur at the following places in the turn.

Neutral    Maximum

Edging       0 - 1            4

Rotary        0 - 1            4

Pressure    0 - 1            4

2) However, in a recent Central Division education event, the clinician asked where in the turn we should have equal tip lead or what I have termed rotary neutral.

The answer was at position 3 using a pivit slip as one example.

The edging and pressure answers were 0 neutral and 3 maximum.

Apparently, the high end racers are practicing getting their tips equal at the apex of the turn now? We then did some excercises to "push" the outside leg out and "pull" / "keep" the inside ankle in at the top of the turn in order to make this happen followed by telemark turns.

I would like to get peoples thoughts on these two apparent differing thoughts on where we should be trying for equal tip lead in the turn. The edging and pressure ones seem pretty close but I am struggling to reconcile the rotary difference.

The above bold statement, labeled 2) is the start of the whole American Horror script.   This is seriously a classic too.

Ok, using an excerise, the pivot slip, as a basis for "where are the ski tips even in a turn?" question is just weird, wrong, and worse.

A pivot slip is not a turn. In fact, in a perfect pivot slip the feet/skis pivot but head straight down the fall line with zero turning from that path.  When the ski tips are even, they and your pelvis are headed straight down the fall line.  Of course they are even.  The ski tips are even when you're sitting on a chairlift, why not use that as evidence?  Btw, as soon as you turn your feet to the side on a chairlift the tips are not even.

This is where looking at ski tracks may be helpful.  Are the tracks in a pivot slip a curve? (If so, it wasn't a pivot slip)  It's a valuable exercise, it is not a turn.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowhawk

JASP,

Yeah, neutral is not a good description - skis flat to the snow is certainly clearer and more specific.  I agree on the pressure one as well.  It could occur anywhere if we so choose so maybe that is better described as when we have equal leg lengths.

OK, forget the term neutral.  It has led this thread into it's definition and while that can be useful and informative it is not the crux of my question.  I should have left it out and just defined my criteria and ask when they occur.

The question is:

Where in the turn should my ski tips be even?

I am assuming that at this point, I am square to the skis - shoulders, hips, knees parallel to equal tips.  But I am open to suggestions that even tips and square are not the same thing and can occur at different points in a turn with a when and why this is a good (or bad) thing.

One camp seems to think this should be slightly after the start of the new turn (position 0 - 1 in my diagram) when the skis are flat to the snow.

Another camp seems to think this should occur at the apex of the turn (position 3 in my diagram).  Clearly, in a pivit slip, this is when our skis are directly in the fall line (position 3 in my diagram). Should we be trying to be square at the fall line in dynamic parallel turns as camp 2 seems to be thinking?

If so, why not?

Well, if there's an entire "camp" spawned by this clinic I don't know what to say.

Perhaps you are misinterpreting the clinician?
Where is the visual evidence of said claims?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowhawk

Kneale,

I did not want to use BB's pictures because the answers are shown there - or at least one set of answers.  Yeah, I love them and in fact showed them to the Examiner.  His first question was how old they were.  Then he showed me that equal tip lead should be at point 8 & 16 in BB's and point 3 in mine.  He felt the diagrams did not reflect current skiing.

So I am still trying to reconcile his answer to BB's diagrams for equal tip lead and what I think I have heard on these forums (and shown in BB's diagrams and your response).

Yeah, I understand the thought of neutral being when the edges release.  However, by my definition, I am asking for when they are flat.  I find the former to much more difficult to envision and think about because that point can vary alot based upon slope, snow conditions, speed, etc.  The skis flat on the snow is pretty easy for this simple mind and I can go back and see it in the snow too.  The thing I like about the flat to the snow is that you cannot stop there.  It is a dynamic point in a turn that is continuous motion - not that the release point isn't either but.....

Ok, so we have a reference on this page for what you're talking about, here's the diagram.

So, how old is the examiner?

All I can say is that thank god Lindsey got out of Buck Hill before said examiner got to her. She'd still be trying to figure out how to make a turn.  Maybe now with gopros, boot cams, helmet cams, and google earth she'd be able to do it.  Show me evidence in Lindsey's turns that her ski tips are usually even in the fall line.  Did the examiner show you examples? (Please keep him away from photos of Lindsey's turns though, have him use Maria's instead.)

The use of looking at ski tips even or not can be valuable in doing/demonstrating wedge turns.  It can tell you if you're doing something like pushing the outside ski, rotating into the turn etc., and you have plenty of time to take a peak at them.

Frankly, all you need to know about "where are the ski tips even?" is shown in a proper wedge turn.

You do bring up an interesting point though about evening up the tips and racing.  Simplyfast brought this up last year I think. That is, sliding the outside foot, or "slicing" it forward near the end of the turn.

I believe you can see it here in Ivica Kostelic's slalom turns where the outside foot is brought forward at the end of the turn.

Oh, note that his ski tips are not even in the fall line.  Maybe his skiing is old school though, he may not really up on current technique like said examiner.

video by 3Caconcept                                                                                              http://youtu.be/AAvhCyoK_RA

Thanks Tog!

I feel a little unloaded on but that's OK.

I think the critical edge angle neutral has all of the same characteristics as my "symmetrical stance point".  Both are a point in time in the turn.  A point to be passed through.  A point to feel your feet, skis, legs, body, etc.  I agree 1000% with you that you have to feel it to make it happen.  For me, I have to think about passing through critical edge angle neutral just as much as "symetrical stance point" so I can do whatever I have to do to get set up to pass through it.

Seems like we share (along with others) the same thoughts about this "equal tips at the fall line" thing.  You're perhaps a but more vocal but...

I am going to follow up with the clinician on what the basis for his comments were.

Thanks folks!

Sorry for seeming to unload on you, it was the theory.

Get the basis for it, and let us know. "This is what they're doing" without any visual evidence doesn't stand up.

I feel that the "neutral" point in the turn cannot come at point 3. In dynamic parallel, that point needs to come well before the fall line. The foragonal movement pattern that is the goal in dynamic parallel ensures that. As the skier's COM moves across the skis at turn initiation, the neutral point is passed, and the inside leg of the new turn becomes shorter than the outside leg. In that position, the edges are out of neutral. The difference in leg length means that the 'rotary neutral' and the pressure neutral have also been passed. If the neutral point is not coming before the fall line, it means that the edges aren't engaged through the first half of the turn. This may be a goal in open parallel, but once a skier moves into dynamic parallel, The edge change comes quickly, and high up in the new turn.

Still going? Gosh I've been too busy actually making turns and not once did I think about creating contrived tip lead. I would suggest you go out and do the same. To be honest I've heard and read a lot of odd ideas from examiners and while squarer to the skis is a sometimes focus of racers, take the rest of his comments with a grain of salt.

Neutral is a point in time that occurs during the transfer of balance from one set of edges to the other set of edges...

Specifically the big toe edge of the stance ski, but that's another discussion.

Not sure about all the other stuff regarding tip lead that's being discussed. Anyone who is willing to assign such absolutes to a turn is focusing their attention on outcomes instead of inputs...

I suspect their was a miscommunication or misinterpretation between the examiner and Snowhawk.  I highly doubt the examiner was making this argument as described by Snowhawk rather this was simply how in was interpreted?

Remember Snowhawk, camera angles can be very deceiving and the most accurate POV would be from directly overhead.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

I suspect their was a miscommunication or misinterpretation between the examiner and Snowhawk.  I highly doubt the examiner was making this argument as described by Snowhawk rather this was simply how in was interpreted?

Or perhaps a queue aimed at getting a student to do something... What could that be?

Well Helluva,  pulling the inside foot back as a tip to help load the inside ski forebody is not a patented move by anyone and has been around for longer than some other systems may imply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

Well Helluva,  pulling the inside foot back as a tip to help load the inside ski forebody is not a patented move by anyone and has been around for longer than some other systems may imply.

Hm. Seems like you're reaching. Not sure what system you're referring to as I'm not familiar with one that teaches pulling the inside ski back with the aim of loading the ski's fore-body... but that was a good guess.

So please share with us "what could that be" Helluva?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

So please share with us "what could that be" Helluva?

I said your guess was a good one - free foot pull back. The purpose however, may still elude. Anyway, that's not what the thread is about. Back to neutral.

Quote:

Anyone who is willing to assign such absolutes to a turn is focusing their attention on outcomes instead of inputs...

That's an interesting perspective. I would agree that a focus on Visual outcomes would be a poor way to evaluate performance but Physical outcomes are rather important to me. Of course, I agree that a focus on inputs is what will get us to reasonable outcomes.

Too often I hear instructors/coaches talk about what they want the students to do in terms of a generally described outcome rather than a carefully described input or set of inputs. Very hard for students to create the described outcome unless they get lucky and accidentally create the correct inputs.

As to tip-lead and inputs, I think deliberately increasing pull-back tension on the inside-ski during a turn is a reasonable input to describe if the physical effect delivers what the coach/instructor wants in that circumstance. The change in tip-lead is simply the visual indication that it's being done (or not) and the degree of tip-lead seen is situationally specific (steepness of slope, degree of angulation, etc).

For me, tip-lead may or man not exist at the moment of 'neutral' (meaning skis flat to the surface). Chances are I've still got just a bit of tip-lead on the uphill-ski when my skis go flat to the slope unless it's a steep slope. On steep slopes I've probably got just a bit of new Inside-ski tip-lead at the moment of flatness. In both cases I've already changed direction and am curving downhill (either due to new-edge engagement or due to gravity simply overpowering the minimal edge-hold I still have on steeper slopes).

.ma

Oh my here we go again...

... redirecting this a bit away from that PMTS / PSIA / stuff , as the legs articulate through the transition lets look at what will most naturally occur. If the skier is in a countered stance through the transition and the legs are extending the uphill foot pull back is a natural consequence as the uphill leg lengthens. At least as long as the shin stays in contact with the boot tongue. If it's a retraction (absorb by flex) transition the outside leg is flexing and the foot will naturally move forward a bit. It's also not implied in this transition that the shin will even be in contact with the boot tongue. What we can do is play with these and change the outcomes so in an extend to release transition we squirt the outside foot forward, or in a flex to release transition we pull it back, or do that with the inside foot. We can even project the body into the new turn and in effect get it ahead of the feet instead of pulling one or both back. All of these things are possible options and for certain situations each could be considered appropriate for the desired outcome. But here's the thing, do you guys understand why we would want to do any of these and what the outcomes of each actually are? If the desired outcome is simply to artificially create or eliminate tip lead aren't we focussing on the wrong thing? Can I hold back the outside foot and do a really good bar stool leg steering move when I am in a countered stance through the transition? Sure. Thus creating a moment closer to the fall line when (like in pivit slips) the tips are square. It also requires a bit if a telemark move and keeping the hips (pelvis) high enough to create the clearance for the inside leg to stay that far back. In essence we are locking that leg up since the ankle will only flex so much when the foot is held back and the knee is not allowed to move so far forward. Hip rotary, or even whole body rotary is a common outcome when this is done by less skilled skiers though, so we need to be careful with this prescription. Another consequence is the pelvis has to stay up away from the snow like in pivit slips to provide room for the locked up leg to stay back and square. Thus limiting the RoM in the lateral plane. So what can we replace that with to keep the skis turning? Rotary of course. That is how we set ourselves up to do good pivot slips, BTW.

Which brings me to the examiner of question and his comments about Barnes' concepts and understanding of modern skiing. He is correct that the graphics are from a few years ago and it was one of the ideas Bob worked on in staff trainer training. How pivot slips relate to regular skiing. It's also something he has posted here several times over the years. The reader's digest version is that the release is common to what he originally called the perfect turn and then re-named the q-turn. The skiing into and out of a countered stance idea also implies that the square moment would be at the fall line but only as long as we assume the pelvis and body are facing the fall line. So when the pelvis and torso are not facing directly in the fall line wouldn't that also mean the square to the skis moment would not occur at the fall line? (BTW, look at the graphic again and notice the direction the body and the pelvis are facing through the transition. It's not the fall line.)

Additionally,(yes I'm repeating myself here) When the legs are of unequal length and the pelvis is high enough off the snow we can force zero tip lead but the only reason I would do that was if it was helping me set up for the next turn. In other words I would never consider it as a default movement pattern. So think about why and when you would do that and I am pretty sure you will come up with less scenarios than you will when you think about all the scenarios where natural tip lead would be more appropriate.

An even more natural approach is to not focus so much on shuffling the feet and just rip some turns. Which is what we see from Ivica, I will almost guarantee his focus was on line, not an arbitrary shuffle move. If his foot squirted forward it may not even be a matter of pulling it forward, it may be he released the ski and it took the foot there. Hard to say though since he isn't here to explain what he was doing. That's the problem here. We can guess (usually incorrectly about his focus) and pontificate about the virtues of any movement pattern we think we see but until you actually go out and ski the same course he skied, or at least a similar gate set, and have it filmed, then personally provide follow up commentary, can you say for sure anything about intent and what is on the film.

Edited by justanotherskipro - 1/31/12 at 1:50pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching