EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching ›  When is a crossover practical ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

When is a crossover practical ? - Page 2

post #31 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

I also don't agree with the hips moving forward in transioitn in crossunder, On the contrary it is one of the few times it is ok for them to move back.


Did I say that? I think I carefully inserted the word "relative". Let's take the case of straight down the fall line turns. Ideally, the skis/feet are going to be flat as they pass underneath the body and the hips are going to be travelling at a constant speed down the fall line. The hips must moving to the inside of the new turn through the transition. Either that or you'll need to take my crack pipe and my chocolate Easter eggs away.

 

Yet, with respect to relativity, I also agree with the "ok for them to move back" comment. My perspective is that as the feet pass under the body, the hips can be moving back relative to the feet but still be relatively moving forward into the new turn because of the path of the feet. This is Bob Barnes' argument against forward movement in the turn. My opinion is that this is a classic example of two people saying "black" vs "white" yet meaning the same thing. I'm ok with whatever definition works for my students, but I've never had to deal with this kind of semantics on snow because the focus on cross under turns is feet not the hips.

 

 

post #32 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

The idea of movements that resemble a metronome, or pendulum is how I express the difference between the two transitions. Beyond that while I agree with the concept The Rusty expressed, I feel it's a bit confusing to talk about a vertically, or horizontally "quiet" upper body since that implies a lack of movement. From my understanding a lack of flailing is the primary use of the term but that doesn't imply a static, or stationary quality.



JASP,

 

Now I'm confused. I can't understand why a quiet upper body is confusing. Maybe we just need to Beating_A_Dead_Horse_by_livius.gif

 

We (Epic bears) have talked about the "Dreaded pop" (i.e. the annoying to see vertical movement of the head) a lot in this forum. It's inefficient and it's why we call jumping jacks exercise. The best bump skiers are amazingly stable from the waist up. Yes, they are not perfectly stable as in rigidly stiff. My point on vertical quietness is that if the only turn you know on the groomers has vertical pop, you're going to have a hard time skiing in the bumps. That's vertical quietness. Yet I also believe that if the only turn you know has no vertical movement, your tool kit is also lacking.

 

The best bump skiers can stay directly in the fall line. It's not easy and that's why it is one of the criteria for judging level 3 candidates. The concept of lateral drift out of the fall line (aka horizontally quiet upper body?) is important to the discussion of cross under vs cross over because you can't really cross over without some lateral movement out of the fall line. I'll concede that this can be confusing if it's applied to the quiet upper body mantra because it's not something that is necessarily bad. Leaning into turns with the upper body is "bad" (inefficient) and that is also a lack of a horizontally quiet upper body. I did not intend to confuse these two points. I only meant to say that keeping the hips in the fall line while the legs work side to side is an obvious demonstration of cross under turns. The same movement can be used in turns that travel out of the fall line. This is where the confusion starts.

post #33 of 46
Thread Starter 

 The Rusty

 

 I like your last post lot of valueable info for anyone wanting to ski zipper line bumps

 

 I would like to also add to keep the upper body quite reducing the amount of travel in the angle of the hips & shoulders so there is no lean in the hips & or shoulders (which would result in travel to create the lean i.e.,  if a level was put accross from right hip to left hip & right shoulder to left shoulder the bubble that indicates level would stay with in the lines that indicates horizontaly level. Hips & shoulders always facing downhill.

 

 I know I said earlier in one of my posts to only flick @ the wrist & use 3 fingers farthest away from thumb as trigger fingers but I find my wrists are not strong enough for rapid fire pole planting & I do use a very small explosive movement from my elbow to my wrist.

 

Below off topic a little but a mistake I think is often being made

 

 I do not agree with a lot of skiers with holding poles to far in front of the body but so the weight of the arms & poles is stacked above the heel & ball of foot. Think of crane traveling down a bumpy road & the effects of leverage on for/aft balance of the crane. Ski poles have the same effect if held out to far in front & is most noticable in conditions such as skied out powder or piles of mash potatoes with ice in between.

post #34 of 46

KL,


 

Read this and look at the photos.

 

Level shoulder and hips in the belly of the turn, iclination at the top.

 

http://www.youcanski.com/en/coaching/incline-to-win.htm

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazzy Legs View Post

 The Rusty

 

 I like your last post lot of valueable info for anyone wanting to ski zipper line bumps

 

 I would like to also add to keep the upper body quite reducing the amount of travel in the angle of the hips & shoulders so there is no lean in the hips & or shoulders (which would result in travel to create the lean i.e.,  if a level was put accross from right hip to left hip & right shoulder to left shoulder the bubble that indicates level would stay with in the lines that indicates horizontaly level. Hips & shoulders always facing downhill.

 

 I know I said earlier in one of my posts to only flick @ the wrist & use 3 fingers farthest away from thumb as trigger fingers but I find my wrists are not strong enough for rapid fire pole planting & I do use a very small explosive movement from my elbow to my wrist.

 

Below off topic a little but a mistake I think is often being made

 

 I do not agree with a lot of skiers with holding poles to far in front of the body but so the weight of the arms & poles is stacked above the heel & ball of foot. Think of crane traveling down a bumpy road & the effects of leverage on for/aft balance of the crane. Ski poles have the same effect if held out to far in front & is most noticable in conditions such as skied out powder or piles of mash potatoes with ice in between.



 

post #35 of 46

Inclination is a great element for high performance cross over initiations

"Projection is the movement of the center of mass (CM) in the direction of the future turn"

post #36 of 46

From www.youcanski.com

 

Crossover and Crossunder Work in Concert

crossover_crossunder_1.jpgcrossover_crossunder_2.jpg

Both types of cross movements are used in Modern skiing. Crossover (CM of mass crosses over the skis) is prevalent in complete GS turns on steep parts of the course. Crossunder (skis cross under the CM) comes into play in slightly more shallow GS turns on the flatter sections. Crossunder is extensively used in modern Slalom. It is usually combined with down-unweigthing. Regardless of type of cross movement the modern GS and SL turns use the entire ski. The turn is usually finished with the pressure on the tail and started with some pressure on the front of the ski. Both types of cross movements not only place the skis on the other side of the body for the next turn but also assist in recentering - shifting the pressure from the tails to the front of the skis. In reality, crossover and crossunder work in concert, providing for simultaneous lateral and forward movement of CM. Combination of skis carving tip-to-tail and quick efficient cross-over and cross-under movements into the new turn produce an early edge set.

 

 

Down-Unweigthing

downunweighting_1.jpgdownunweighting_2.jpg

Down-unweigthing is used in SL and GS as the way of unloading the skis to allow them to cross-under the body for the new turn. It creates a so-called "virtual bump" between the turns. Skier retracts his legs just as if he was going over the bump in the transition phase and extends them into the turn as it was the galley in between the bumps. Combination of down-unweigthing and cross-under movement works well in shallow turns on moderate terrain. It provides for an early edge set and carving with both skis which makes for much faster skiing through the moderately flat sections of the course.

 

 

In the "Down-unweighting photo (yellow helmet) pay special attention to upper lower body separation at neutral, right in the midle of the transion. This is generally even more pronoucned in slalom wher cross under is used more.

post #37 of 46

Summer must be here.

The Rusty, The idea of your zipper staying vertical might be a great construct for teaching angulation but as the leg extension (laterally) exceeds the length of the outside leg, lateral displacement of the core and lower torso occurs. Thus the mental construct of the pendulum where the pivot point is the head. Like a-man I would say the concerted combination of both occurs. If it didn't our lateral and fore aft Balance would be limited.


Edited by justanotherskipro - 4/9/12 at 11:12am
post #38 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post

We (Epic bears) have talked about the "Dreaded pop" (i.e. the annoying to see vertical movement of the head) a lot in this forum. It's inefficient and it's why we call jumping jacks exercise. The best bump skiers are amazingly stable from the waist up. Yes, they are not perfectly stable as in rigidly stiff. My point on vertical quietness is that if the only turn you know on the groomers has vertical pop, you're going to have a hard time skiing in the bumps. That's vertical quietness. Yet I also believe that if the only turn you know has no vertical movement, your tool kit is also lacking.

 

The best bump skiers can stay directly in the fall line. It's not easy and that's why it is one of the criteria for judging level 3 candidates. The concept of lateral drift out of the fall line (aka horizontally quiet upper body?) is important to the discussion of cross under vs cross over because you can't really cross over without some lateral movement out of the fall line. I'll concede that this can be confusing if it's applied to the quiet upper body mantra because it's not something that is necessarily bad. Leaning into turns with the upper body is "bad" (inefficient) and that is also a lack of a horizontally quiet upper body. I did not intend to confuse these two points. I only meant to say that keeping the hips in the fall line while the legs work side to side is an obvious demonstration of cross under turns. The same movement can be used in turns that travel out of the fall line. This is where the confusion starts.



Excellent posting icon14.gif.

 

Vertically quiet upper body is achieved by flexing and extending, working with the legs, keeping the movement in the legs. Horisontally quiet upper body is achieved by staying close to the fall line. None of these are in any way indicating lack of movement. Yes, no cross over the way its defined here at epic without horisontally drift. No, no confusion on my part. You can have your body trawel out of the fall line while crossing under. Its all about CoM management. In a cross under your hips are sent back and you are momentarily in the back seat. But you can compensate. For example you can slip into a tuck. Or you can develop lots of momentum at the end of the turn for a long float. Or you can start the new turn after the transition/float in a pivot with extended legs aligning your CoM over your BoS for maximum lateral sideways displacement. Or make a clean carved entry. Depending on cricumstances.

 

post #39 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post

From www.youcanski.com

 

Crossover and Crossunder Work in Concert

crossover_crossunder_1.jpgcrossover_crossunder_2.jpg

Both types of cross movements are used in Modern skiing. Crossover (CM of mass crosses over the skis) is prevalent in complete GS turns on steep parts of the course. Crossunder (skis cross under the CM) comes into play in slightly more shallow GS turns on the flatter sections. Crossunder is extensively used in modern Slalom. It is usually combined with down-unweigthing. Regardless of type of cross movement the modern GS and SL turns use the entire ski. The turn is usually finished with the pressure on the tail and started with some pressure on the front of the ski. Both types of cross movements not only place the skis on the other side of the body for the next turn but also assist in recentering - shifting the pressure from the tails to the front of the skis. In reality, crossover and crossunder work in concert, providing for simultaneous lateral and forward movement of CM. Combination of skis carving tip-to-tail and quick efficient cross-over and cross-under movements into the new turn produce an early edge set.

 

 

Down-Unweigthing

downunweighting_1.jpgdownunweighting_2.jpg

Down-unweigthing is used in SL and GS as the way of unloading the skis to allow them to cross-under the body for the new turn. It creates a so-called "virtual bump" between the turns. Skier retracts his legs just as if he was going over the bump in the transition phase and extends them into the turn as it was the galley in between the bumps. Combination of down-unweigthing and cross-under movement works well in shallow turns on moderate terrain. It provides for an early edge set and carving with both skis which makes for much faster skiing through the moderately flat sections of the course.

 

 

In the "Down-unweighting photo (yellow helmet) pay special attention to upper lower body separation at neutral, right in the midle of the transion. This is generally even more pronoucned in slalom wher cross under is used more.


Hi

 

This article is a bit confusing to me. In the two top photos the skiers are in the middle of a turn close to apex. It is impossible to say if cross under or over has been used because at the gate the skiers look the same. In the two bottom photos the skiers are flexing through the transition. There is a comment that only the skier in the yellow helmet is down-unweighting. So what about the guy in the blue helmet? Very confusing.... kind of proves my point that cross over and cross under are the same thing. If we do not define a cross over to be vaulting of the body from side to side, ILE type of thing. Im going to post my diagram of the definitions once again:

 

cross.JPG

 

post #40 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Summer must be here.

The Rusty, The idea of your zipper staying vertical might be a great construct for teaching angulation but as the leg extension (laterally) exceeds the length of the outside leg, lateral displacement of the core and lower torso occurs. Thus the mental construct of the pendulum where the pivot point is the head. Like a-man I would say the concerted combination of both occurs. If it didn't our lateral and fore aft Balance would be limited.



I like the pivot point at the head idea for supporting the concept of inclination. I don't like the head as a pivot point idea because if there is no separation between the upper and lower body, then either the feet would come off the snow or the pivot point would have to shift. I don't have a problem when lateral displacement of the core and lower torso occurs as long as the goal is not strictly in the fall line descent.

post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post



I like the pivot point at the head idea for supporting the concept of inclination. I don't like the head as a pivot point idea because if there is no separation between the upper and lower body, then either the feet would come off the snow or the pivot point would have to shift. I don't have a problem when lateral displacement of the core and lower torso occurs as long as the goal is not strictly in the fall line descent.



If you flex through the transition, isnt it at least en theory possible to have our head as the pivotpoint without our skis comming off the snow?

 

post #42 of 46

Fall line = no lateral displacement of the core? Heres a link from another thread that shows some short turns down the fall line. I'd say some latertal displacement must occur, even in zipperline turns. Especially at the feet. When that lateral RoM exceeds the leg length, the core must move laterally. Doesn't mean as the skis and feet move under the body angulation can't occur.

 

http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=07dc6ebd9de99576c8cf6e6453e102f9&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.epicski.com%2Ft%2F111338%2Fplease-ma-my-last-video%23post_1446091&v=1&libid=1334044342181&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWop_Zc0x1Sc%26feature%3Dfvwrel%C2%A0&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.epicski.com%2Ff%2F9%2Fski-instruction-coaching&title=Please%20MA%20my%20last%20video%23post_1446091&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWop_Zc0x1Sc%26amp%3Bfeature%3Dfvwrel%26nbsp%3B&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13340443823851

post #43 of 46

Unless your this good...

    <iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/36306390" width="400" height="300" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>

post #44 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6 View Post



If you flex through the transition, isnt it at least en theory possible to have our head as the pivotpoint without our skis comming off the snow?

 



Yes. That's what I meant when I said "no separation". Flex of lower body would be separation. But I've never seen a pendulum flex through the transition, except for my Medicus golf club!

post #45 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Fall line = no lateral displacement of the core? Heres a link from another thread that shows some short turns down the fall line. I'd say some latertal displacement must occur, even in zipperline turns. Especially at the feet. When that lateral RoM exceeds the leg length, the core must move laterally. Doesn't mean as the skis and feet move under the body angulation can't occur.

 


Ayup - that's good skiing.

 

We're getting into semantics here. All I'm saying is that it's possible to ski with no lateral displacement of the core. It's no big deal when skiing in powder. When skiing in bumps, the only time you really see it is at the last run out section in comps (and calling those turns is generous). When skiing on groomers with dynamic carved turns, the force of the ski rebound energy make it extremely difficult to eliminate all lateral displacement. I agree that most people would consider a lot of skiing that has some lateral displacement to be fall line skiing. But then we get into that gray area of how much lateral displacement does it take to become not fall line skiing. It's sort of like the gray area between cross over and cross under. The purpose of my semantics here is that when you do get into the extreme case of no lateral displacement, it's hard to make a case that cross over can exist in these turns and that to the extent that there is some lateral displacement you can make a case that there is some cross over that can (but not necessarily does) occur.

post #46 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post


Ayup - that's good skiing.

 

We're getting into semantics here. All I'm saying is that it's possible to ski with no lateral displacement of the core. It's no big deal when skiing in powder. When skiing in bumps, the only time you really see it is at the last run out section in comps (and calling those turns is generous). When skiing on groomers with dynamic carved turns, the force of the ski rebound energy make it extremely difficult to eliminate all lateral displacement. I agree that most people would consider a lot of skiing that has some lateral displacement to be fall line skiing. But then we get into that gray area of how much lateral displacement does it take to become not fall line skiing. It's sort of like the gray area between cross over and cross under. The purpose of my semantics here is that when you do get into the extreme case of no lateral displacement, it's hard to make a case that cross over can exist in these turns and that to the extent that there is some lateral displacement you can make a case that there is some cross over that can (but not necessarily does) occur.


Offcourse the feet would be deviating from the fall line as they cross back and forth underneath to make turns and slow us down. But just like TheRusty correctly here points out its a matter of our core. Here is a beautiful example of keeping the core in the fall line. Nice and stable. Both vertically and laterally sideways. Its the legs that should do the work.

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching ›  When is a crossover practical ?