EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Does finesse skiing require a finesse ski?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does finesse skiing require a finesse ski?

post #1 of 21
6/5/12 at 4:57pm
Thread Starter 
Thinking about the match - or lack - between the design of a ski and the style of the skier. For instance, does what's called "finesse" skiing require a light, comparatively soft ski? Obviously weight and skill level figure in here. But will a power skier be happy on a Fischer Watea? Will a finesse skier thrive on a Stockli? Put another way, independent of level - since better skiers will ski faster, more demanding terrain - does the beefiness of a ski help/hinder particular styles?
Reply
post #2 of 21
6/5/12 at 5:30pm

for sure, but your definition of finesse matches up with "weight" i think.  

Everyone knows that weight affects the type of optimal ski and skichoice.

 

The way I see it:

 

lightweight+power-style skiers are basically pushing their functional envelope to be like a heavier "weight" skier (with average style)

 

conversely

 

heavyweight+finesse-style are basically pushing their functional envelope to be like a lighter "weight" skier.

Reply
post #3 of 21
6/5/12 at 5:33pm

Perhaps a skillful skier adjusts his style of skiing to the type of ski he is on as he does for conditions/terrain.

Reply
post #4 of 21
6/5/12 at 5:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post

Perhaps a skillful skier adjusts his style of skiing to the type of ski he is on as he does for conditions/terrain.

Amen and Amen!

 

The Indian adjusts to the arrows he is shooting.  Hopefully said Indian is good with a bow.

Reply
post #5 of 21
6/5/12 at 7:08pm

If the bow is so stiff that the little brave can't pull the string, his aim will be affected negatively.

 

OP, could define his terms with more detail, they are rather vague. I don't know what a "finesse" skier is. I know what a "technical" skier is...

when people start calling themselves aggressive or finesse, I usually think: lacking.

Reply
post #6 of 21
6/5/12 at 7:40pm
Thread Starter 

Well, OK, I define "finesse" as a style that tends to be light on and off the edges, tends to slice crud at angles instead of blast through it, pays a lot of attention to angles and exerts as little pressure as he/she needs to when creating said angles. A power skier, by contrast, would be more pronounced with the edges, spend more time digging them in, rely more, according to an instructor I talked with, on athleticism. FWIW, one of the "little braves" would be Sierra Jim, who has described himself as a finesse skier, and I'l assume knows a) what he's talking about and b) how to pull his string. He's also over 190, last time I read here. Phil also describes himself as a finesse skier, also not a little brave, and paradoxically he's often referred to himself as "aggressive," so perhaps he's, ah, "lacking." Only TC can say for sure. wink.gif Conversely, my wife, who's about 135, low advanced, has been described by several level III's as a power skier. And she likes fairly stiff skis. (No, won't go there.) So that pretty much negates a couple of the posts that assume finesse is related to skill set or size. 

 

Now back to the start: In what ways does or doesn't the ski design - as it relates to stiffness and dampness, not other parameters like shape or camber - impact the technique? Slider seems to be saying that if you're good, you just adjust your technique to the ski. All well and good, but doesn't address the central question, since the fact you have to adjust your technique implies that some adjustments are different than others, depending on the ski. So how does the ski affect the technique? 

Reply
post #7 of 21
6/5/12 at 8:02pm

IMHO finesse skiing does not require a finesse ski, but a finesse ski does require finesse skiing.  Also, a finesse ski is certainly easier to learn finesse skiing with than a power ski, and you can only put so much power down unless you have a powerful ski.

Reply
post #8 of 21
6/5/12 at 8:19pm

What minor point I was making, I think you missed anyway.

 

regarding the analogy of the stiff bow: it doesn't take knowledge just to pull it back, it takes strength. likewise, you can't finesse a 192cm Legend Pro Rider. You will have to drive it with precision and focused energy. 

 

With lots of respect for the people you mention, I don't think characterizing anything as power or finesse is going to provide much insight. Example: You could start a turn with a subtle, light touch, flowing with terrain, and power out of it to apply severe braking, or work hard counter-fall line to change your line. You could accomplish both extremes in one run, on one set of skis.  A complete skier uses everything they have gathered from experience. If you want to discuss what a limited skier can do with certain equipment, that is another matter = gear to hide, disguise, and otherwise cover weak skills.

 

You say Phil has been defined, by himself and others, as being power-ful and finesse-ful. there's no paradox there. that's what a complete skier is.

 

If a ski is the right size and the right design for conditions, some people can do anything with it. some can't.

Reply
post #9 of 21
6/5/12 at 10:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

IMHO finesse skiing does not require a finesse ski, but a finesse ski does require finesse skiing.  Also, a finesse ski is certainly easier to learn finesse skiing with than a power ski, and you can only put so much power down unless you have a powerful ski.

A great skier can ski any ski with finesse!

Reply
post #10 of 21
6/6/12 at 8:53am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

IMHO finesse skiing does not require a finesse ski, but a finesse ski does require finesse skiing.  Also, a finesse ski is certainly easier to learn finesse skiing with than a power ski, and you can only put so much power down unless you have a powerful ski.

An interesting response. I'll play Devil's Advocate. Seth (and a number of other, ah, assertive pro skiers) ski some fairly soft sticks. Which you could call a finesse ski. But they are seriously pushing/driving that ski. So are they all finesse skiers who don't - by your def - put down the power? Even if a fair amount of FA is being applied? Or second example, a Level III I know at Smuggs skis a Blizzard One on softer days, let's call it a famously springy finesse-ish ski, and he can push that sucker hard. Is he then a finesse skier no matter how hard he skis? Or third example: If you're skiing a Kendo - which is a fair example of a power ski IMO - and you're doing it with, ah, finesse - are you able to bend it? Or is this back to weight, where a heavier skier can ski a power ski with finesse, but not a lighter skier? 

 

My own hunch is that different approaches to finesse or power are required because of the ski. But trying to work out what they'd be. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by davluri View Post

 

With lots of respect for the people you mention, I don't think characterizing anything as power or finesse is going to provide much insight. Example: You could start a turn with a subtle, light touch, flowing with terrain, and power out of it to apply severe braking, or work hard counter-fall line to change your line. You could accomplish both extremes in one run, on one set of skis.  A complete skier uses everything they have gathered from experience. If you want to discuss what a limited skier can do with certain equipment, that is another matter = gear to hide, disguise, and otherwise cover weak skills.

 

 

Can't disagree with anything said here, but for the third time, I'm not asking about whether a good skier can ski any ski with any style. That's self-evident. Any experienced Level III could demo any style on a Stormrider or a Watea, I'd guess. But it's also self-evident that the task will be different on each of those skis. So I'm asking whether the choice of ski will facilitate or hinder a particular style. And if yes, then HOW? That's a different question, and it's not getting answered by the it's-not-the-arrow-it's-the-archer metaphors.   th_dunno-1[1].gif

Reply
post #11 of 21
6/6/12 at 12:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Thinking about the match - or lack - between the design of a ski and the style of the skier. For instance, does what's called "finesse" skiing require a light, comparatively soft ski? Obviously weight and skill level figure in here. But will a power skier be happy on a Fischer Watea? Will a finesse skier thrive on a Stockli? Put another way, independent of level - since better skiers will ski faster, more demanding terrain - does the beefiness of a ski help/hinder particular styles?

 

You forgot to throw boot stiffness in as a variable.

Reply
post #12 of 21
6/6/12 at 12:54pm

I don't know the answer to this, except to say that our Austrian guide made lots of little Austrian instructor turns on Stormrider Schmidt Pros ... I wouldn't use the word "finesse" anywhere within hearing distance of his bombastic 30-year-old-Austrian ears, but with us, he wasn't exactly powering around. I'm sure he could, though. 

Reply
post #13 of 21
6/6/12 at 3:55pm

It must be admitted, however, that if you have a big powerful damp ski there is only so much you can do with it without applying some power.

 

Snow conditions also play a role; you can only get soft snow to push back so hard. 

 

And then, like everything else, it is a matter of degree.  You might be "powering" in soft snow on a Blizzard one, but are you "powering" compared to "powering" on a hard surface at speed on a pair of Atomic Red sleds?  (Power being work/time, e.g. high force over a large distance in a short time.)

 

The semantic differentiation lends itself too easily to disparaging remarks, in that some skiers use the term "power" style to imply a ham-fisted lack of fine control ajd use "finesse" as the remedy, while others see "finesse" as an excuse to avoid truly exercising some force.   IMHO, a truly good skier can ski with finesse AND power at the same time, and the distinction is really artificial.  Anybody who thinks you don't need finesse at the limit of grip in a Downhill turn has another think coming.

Reply
post #14 of 21
6/6/12 at 6:24pm
Thread Starter 

^^^^ Really good points you bring up. A "beefy" ski may have a different envelope, so the upper extremes rather than the middle will be where the difference is relevant. Some of this is about edge angles too; I can bend a very stiff ski at moderate speed but it requires serious angles, which require serious attention to my mechanics. Seems to me the only reasonable way to visualize it is as how do you generate force. All else equal, a stiffer ski will require either more acceleration or more weight or more leverage. So perhaps you can only ski a power ski with finesse at serious speeds, eg being aggressive and having finesse at the same time. Yet Segbrown's comment is worth thinking on. I've seen the same thing on this side of the pond; a good skier on a very stiff ski doing nice precise slow turns. 

 

Semantics - I've definitely read a lot of connotations that gender finesse skis or skiing: Feminine, or for guys who are unwilling/unable to really drive a ski hard when the going gets tough. How many TGR members would admit to being a finesse skier? Or even to turning? (Although the W99 and 112 RP have been getting some interesting comments about how the proper way to ski them is to stay light, go airborne rather than attack crud.)

 

Also note the classic French finesse/Teutonic power skiing stereotypes here, not only gendered but encumbered with a history of warfare, the finesse crew always losing. OTOH, not so many connotations that power is ham fisted. More that power is athletic, male, can't-be-bothered with details, charging through anything in the way. Like the competitors in a long running story about humans and nature. Do we domesticate/attack it, or do we adjust/go with its dictates? 

 

But that's a mythological narrative. The reality is what you say; a decent skier can attack or flow. And yeah, my limited exposure to gates suggests that you don't exactly attack them mindlessly either. Still, at the end of the day, there are these skis of different stiffness and these skiers of different style...

Reply
post #15 of 21
6/7/12 at 5:40pm

Teutonic power ski?  You mean like the Fischer Watea, previously referred to as a finesse ski?  OK, this is probably the exception.  OK, other than some Atomic models, and maybe Head, and...I give up. These things get blurred.    

 

i honestly have no idea if I am a finesse skier or a power skier.  I am probably neither.  I like having a stable, damp crub-buster and I like having a light, nimble, playful ski. 

 

I like the concept of a spectrum of finesse-to-power.  At different times both are utilized equally, sometimes more power is utilized than finesse, sometimes more finesse that power.  I personally don't think anyone can be purely one or the other.  I've also seen people who thought they were more power-oriented, but when I see them ski their finesse was evident.  Same thing with "finesse" skiers.

 

Now, to the OP.  Obviously a great many skis are oriented more towards one end of the spectrum or the other.  Finesse skiing does not "require" a finesse ski, but it probably makes it more readily accessible/achievable/learnable to the average skier.   As Seg and others have pointed out, regardless of the skis, a skilled skier will be able to finesse as needed.  Or power as needed.  Yeah, maybe a little more attention or effort needs to be paid, but not so much that it's a big deal.


Edited by DesiredUsername - 6/8/12 at 9:12am
Reply
post #16 of 21
6/7/12 at 7:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post

Perhaps a skillful skier adjusts his style of skiing to the type of ski he is on as he does for conditions/terrain.

 

^^^ What he said!

Reply
post #17 of 21
6/7/12 at 8:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Well, OK, I define "finesse" as a style that tends to be light on and off the edges, tends to slice crud at angles instead of blast through it, pays a lot of attention to angles and exerts as little pressure as he/she needs to when creating said angles. A power skier, by contrast, would be more pronounced with the edges, spend more time digging them in, rely more, according to an instructor I talked with, on athleticism. FWIW, one of the "little braves" would be Sierra Jim, who has described himself as a finesse skier, and I'l assume knows a) what he's talking about and b) how to pull his string. He's also over 190, last time I read here. Phil also describes himself as a finesse skier, also not a little brave, and paradoxically he's often referred to himself as "aggressive," so perhaps he's, ah, "lacking." Only TC can say for sure. wink.gif Conversely, my wife, who's about 135, low advanced, has been described by several level III's as a power skier. And she likes fairly stiff skis. (No, won't go there.) So that pretty much negates a couple of the posts that assume finesse is related to skill set or size. 

 

Your starting definitions are comparing apples and oranges; every one of your apparent contradictions is the result of that.    You've just defined 'finesse' in terms of outcomes,  and 'power' in terms of methods  (actually, the ski instructor did that by saying 'athleticism').    

 

"Light on and off the edges" - is an outcome, a post facto observation

"Slicing crud at angles"  - an outcome

"Blasting through it" - another outcome

"athleticism" - not an outcome but rather a state of physical awareness and control.

 

Up to you of course, but I could suggest that we realign definitions and compare like to like instead of comparing the process of roasting to (unroasted) watermelons.

 

For example, we can keep "power" as a method meaning "using significant body control ability and exertion to cope with skiing situations and create desired outcomes", we can have "finesse" as a method meaning "using significant mental awareness and processing to reduce demands on physical exertion and control ability for a desired outcome".    

 

If we do that, we can even choose appropriate definitions for  'agressive' and 'laid-back' without any overlap whatsoever with the two other terms.     So that 'agressive finesse skier' would make complete sense (and not be redundant).   So that 'laid-back power skier' would make complete sense (and not be redundant).

 

If we do the semantic groundwork like that, we can make an answer of "the gear itself doesn't dictate power or finesse" possible without apparent contradiction.

Reply
post #18 of 21
6/8/12 at 7:47am

The stiffer the ski the more energy it requires to make it work effectively, which needs to come from some combination of skiers weight, speed and muscle.  In my mind true finesse skiing includes being very relaxed and balanced on your skis, which means lower energy from the skier (i.e. less muscle).  This can be achieved on stiff skis but it requires move speed, which increases the forces at work and is therefore counterproductive to finesse.  A softer ski has a bigger sweet spot that allows easier balance, requires a slower reaction time, and less energy from the skiers muscles. 

 

A Mantra and Watea 95 have almost identical dimensions, but it is hard to relax on the Mantra and easy on the Watea.  If you want to attack the mountain and rip it up grab the Mantras, but if you want to make love to it with finesse take the Wateas.  Both are excellent skis, but IMO it takes a lot more concentration and work to finesse the Mantras. 

 

Are the mountains your battle field or your bedroom?  It is tough to finesse a sword, but sometimes they come in real handy.

Reply
post #19 of 21
6/8/12 at 8:07am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cantunamunch View Post

 

Your starting definitions are comparing apples and oranges; every one of your apparent contradictions is the result of that.    You've just defined 'finesse' in terms of outcomes,  and 'power' in terms of methods  (actually, the ski instructor did that by saying 'athleticism'). Nope. My definitions are not concerned with formally differentiating input or output, they're concerned with listing attributes that in the popular mind characterize two approaches to a dynamic system. And they're roughly parallel. Moreover, don't see how such a dynamic system is a simple "cause-effect" as you make out. Rather, ongoing input:output, iterate throughout the action. A initial input at the tip leads to an outcome, which in term leads to/waits upon a further input. And so on. It gets continuous, not polar.

 

Athleticism is neither a method nor an outcome, it's a state trait, an initial attribute of the system that impacts both input and output. Which you mention below. So I'm not sure how my instructor was considering it a method. He seemed to be differentiating between folks who rely more on muscle force and folks who rely more on using the terrain, on balance. I've had other instructors talk about this comparing me and my wife; I'm all about balance, she's all about pressure. IMO it's also something of a gloss not to be taken literally, as in power = athletic, finesse = non-athletic. I'm the former competitive athlete in the family. And if you want to PM SJ to inform him he's non-athletic, all the best wishes...

 

"Light on and off the edges" - is an outcome, a post facto observation Don't agree; it's a description of how much force you apply to the edges as you engage and disengage. Which is a function of technique. Your "post facto" (outcome?) variable here would be whether you successfully carve. 

"Slicing crud at angles"  - an outcome Again, the slice may be an outcome, but the angle is input that allows the slice.

"Blasting through it" - another outcome. Same as above, the blast is an outcome of a shallower angle.

"athleticism" - not an outcome but rather a state of physical awareness and control. As I said above. Nor is it a method. 

 

Up to you of course, but I could suggest that we realign definitions and compare like to like instead of comparing the process of roasting to (unroasted) watermelons. Weird fruit fixations you have.

 

For example, we can keep "power" as a method meaning "using significant body control ability and exertion to cope with skiing situations and create desired outcomes", we can have "finesse" as a method meaning "using significant mental awareness and processing to reduce demands on physical exertion and control ability for a desired outcome".  I like thinking outside the box, but IMO this doesn't work because it creates a false dichotomy between mind and body, as if physics only applies to power skiing and finesse skiing is all in the head. Power skiing I think requires a specific visual and kinesthetic mental map, just as finesse skiing requires body control and balance.

 

If we do that, we can even choose appropriate definitions for  'agressive' and 'laid-back' without any overlap whatsoever with the two other terms.     So that 'agressive finesse skier' would make complete sense (and not be redundant).   So that 'laid-back power skier' would make complete sense (and not be redundant). Again, we could do this, and get rid of overlap, but how do we then describe what "laid back" means in terms of forces at the edge? 

 

If we do the semantic groundwork like that, we can make an answer of "the gear itself doesn't dictate power or finesse" possible without apparent contradiction. Semantic groundwork agree to be a good thing. But here, seems like we're just defining the problem away, not addressing it. Kinda like changing the statistical threshold for undernutrition in India, so that fewer kids are hungry. (True.)


Edited by beyond - 6/8/12 at 8:20am
Reply
post #20 of 21
6/8/12 at 8:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudfoot View Post
  It is tough to finesse a sword, but sometimes they come in real handy.

 

 

You should talk to more fencing instructors.  biggrin.gif

Reply
post #21 of 21
6/8/12 at 8:49am

I don't think fencing swords are comparable to skis.  I was thinking more along the lines of a Claymore.  Very Mantra like. In fact many of the other Volkls like the Katana are named after swords.

 

TS-MACLEOD502.jpg

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Does finesse skiing require a finesse ski?