EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Do you see any new big mountain ski techniques emerging?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Do you see any new big mountain ski techniques emerging?

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 

I usually watch Warren Miller movies every fall to see what are the new techniques are emerging…

I am at loss this year; I am failing to see something new that makes sense.  I am sure I just missed it.  Please point me in the right direction.

The only thing I saw consistently used (and was not very much excited about it) is turn initiation with the shoulders (came back from 80s): at the end of the turn you drop downhill shoulder, at the same time raise and crossover the ski with your uphill shoulder to initiate the new turn in powder.  Do you see it too? Skiers used to do it while skiing super stiff wood only skis 20 – 30cm longer then their height and leather boots – it  was the only way to turn with that equipment.  Why World Class skiers are doing it now?  

post #2 of 28

I have not seen any change...which is to be expected.

 

Unless something significant changes gear wise...then real technique changes are not likely.

post #3 of 28
stroller:

Do you see it too? Skiers used to do it while skiing super stiff wood only skis 20 – 30cm longer then their height and leather boots – it  was the only way to turn with that equipment.  Why World Class skiers are doing it now?  

 

In about the year 2000 or so there came to be a lot more emphasis on acrobatics, aerials, and big inverted stunts in the sport.  While the emphasis on those things has increased, the emphasis on actual skiing skill has decreased.  Steadily decreased.  No one really cares about skiing skill anymore, they just want to see crazy stunts.  The new equipment makes it very possible for a mediocre skier to go fast down powder which is all that is needed for a movie as long as the jumps between the powder are not lacking. 

 

This of course is not true in racing... but in the movies, this is very true.  In moguls it's even somewhat true.  It was around the year 2000 that inverted aerials became allowed, and competitions began being held on perfectly manicured, machine made moguls.  Those aren't moguls. 

 

Don't look to new movie skiers for the new best techniques, you won't find them there.  Only the older stars that are either out of the game or almost out of the game had the skill that you are looking for. 

 

Your quote above shows that you already noticed what I am saying.  I think Warren Miller is actually better than most movie companies at showing a wider range of types of skiers... most movie companies show just 'big mountain' skiing and what I am saying is even more apparent in those compay's films. 

 

There may be people here that will disagree with this, but I am really sure this is right.

post #4 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake Saunders View Post

 

In about the year 2000 or so there came to be a lot more emphasis on acrobatics, aerials, and big inverted stunts in the sport.  While the emphasis on those things has increased, the emphasis on actual skiing skill has decreased.  Steadily decreased.  No one really cares about skiing skill anymore, they just want to see crazy stunts.  The new equipment makes it very possible for a mediocre skier to go fast down powder which is all that is needed for a movie as long as the jumps between the powder are not lacking. 

 

This of course is not true in racing... but in the movies, this is very true.  In moguls it's even somewhat true.  It was around the year 2000 that inverted aerials became allowed, and competitions began being held on perfectly manicured, machine made moguls.  Those aren't moguls. 

 

Don't look to new movie skiers for the new best techniques, you won't find them there.  Only the older stars that are either out of the game or almost out of the game had the skill that you are looking for. 

 

Your quote above shows that you already noticed what I am saying.  I think Warren Miller is actually better than most movie companies at showing a wider range of types of skiers... most movie companies show just 'big mountain' skiing and what I am saying is even more apparent in those compay's films. 

 

There may be people here that will disagree with this, but I am really sure this is right.

  I would agree as well...lots and lots of rotated and leaning in turns now-a-daysnonono2.gif  I fear the young-uns will emulate what they see their heroes doing.

post #5 of 28

If anything thou...it does appear to me the trend is slowly reversing and we are seeing more and more actual skiing in the movies, not just "hit,plop,cut,hit,plop,cut" like a few years ago.

post #6 of 28

Just tell them to watch Hoji. 

post #7 of 28
Thread Starter 
I in fact beleive that Big Mountain skiing is the most difficalt and demanding in terms of technique. I think what emerges in Big Mountain Skiing eventualy gets implemented in other dissiplines including racing.

However equipment does effect skiing technique a lot. Few years ago we have got rokers, which was amaising, but it pushed some people into much longer skis then they need.

Last year ski's tails became stiff and short and shovels supper long and unrully. That added a lot of float in the powder, but also took away responsivness so skiers started to innitiate turns with thier sholders. And not just any skiers - Chris Davenport start to do it as well since he switch to Kastle - you can see how his technique change with the change of skis brand.

So the question is Weather this is a temporary phenomina and lengths of skis will go down and size of the ski tail will increase once again... Or maybe this turn initiation with the shoulder will evolve into something meaningfull?
post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by stroller View Post

I in fact beleive that Big Mountain skiing is the most difficalt and demanding in terms of technique. I think what emerges in Big Mountain Skiing eventualy gets implemented in other dissiplines including racing.
However equipment does effect skiing technique a lot. Few years ago we have got rokers, which was amaising, but it pushed some people into much longer skis then they need.
Last year ski's tails became stiff and short and shovels supper long and unrully. That added a lot of float in the powder, but also took away responsivness so skiers started to innitiate turns with thier sholders. And not just any skiers - Chris Davenport start to do it as well since he switch to Kastle - you can see how his technique change with the change of skis brand.
So the question is Weather this is a temporary phenomina and lengths of skis will go down and size of the ski tail will increase once again... Or maybe this turn initiation with the shoulder will evolve into something meaningfull?

 

You sure about that?

 

http://chrisdavenport.com/media/videos/

 

 

A few quick clips...Not all clips show him skiing, but the Antartica one does...easy to see he intiates with rock solid ILS, no upper body rotation.  Also note...he is on Kastles.  Further with heeavy mountaneering packs...the last thing you want is to get that pack rotating...you want to keep it as stable as possible, your upper body rotation idea creates all kinds of problems for no benefit.


Edited by Skidude72 - 11/28/12 at 9:21pm
post #9 of 28

  I don't think we'll see turning with the shoulders in racing too often...

post #10 of 28

Biggest difference I see is that the big mountain riders are skiing their lines with their eyes on the bottom

post #11 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

 

You sure about that?

 

http://chrisdavenport.com/media/videos/

 

 

A few quick clips...Not all clips show him skiing, but the Antartica one does...easy to see he intiates with rock solid ILS, no upper body rotation.  Also note...he is on Kastles.  Further with heeavy mountaneering packs...the last thing you want is to get that pack rotating...you want to keep it as stable as possible, your upper body rotation idea creates all kinds of problems for no benefit.

 

SD72,  Your inner MA eye deceives you; Davenport never does ILS.  It's merely the closest concept in your TTS skiing ontology and your eye has deformed his skiing to conform to your reality.  Proof:  he had the (mis)fortune of having the Devil of Dumont for a coach in his formative years.

post #12 of 28

I heard a rumor that big mountain skiers have actually been known to UNWEIGHT their skis to initiate a turn in heavy snow and tight quarters?

popcorn.gif

post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpedges View Post

 

SD72,  Your inner MA eye deceives you; Davenport never does ILS.  It's merely the closest concept in your TTS skiing ontology and your eye has deformed his skiing to conform to your reality.  Proof:  he had the (mis)fortune of having the Devil of Dumont for a coach in his formative years.


ROTF.gif  C'mon man.....serioulsy.  HH can change names all he likes, but if you think Davenport is using upper body rotation to intiate you really are drinking the kool-aid.  Even HH doesnt preach that...no one does.  Further, even Larry501 admitted ILS was part of HH's school of thought...his only argument being passive vs active.  Of course, you will note, Davenport's skis are actually in the air when he intiates on at least one of those turns...so that kinda kills the passive idea.  Sorry mate.

 

 

 

Further...FWIW - Larry501 even admitted on a HH camp, HH's other coaches actually taught and did pivoting drills with the group!!!!!!!  roflmao.gif

 

 

Here is a great ILS demo - dont know who this guy is but....notice how his skis are turned more then his upper body?  The only way that can happen is the bottom half of him...is uncoupled from the top half of him - so either that is happening with twist in the spine, or twist of the femurs in the hips - the fact that his pelvis stays aligned to the shoulders tells me its femurs in the pelvis or ILS:

 

post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

I heard a rumor that big mountain skiers have actually been known to UNWEIGHT their skis to initiate a turn in heavy snow and tight quarters?

popcorn.gif

 

Of course they do....all skiers unweight to change direction.

 

Be careful thou...and understand "unweight" might not mean what you think it does...ie we can have 100% of our weight on the skis...and still be "unweighted".wink.gif

 

 

 

 

For clarity - as we make a turn - turning forces start to act on the skier - we call this "Weighted"...when we release the turn or allow the skis to flatten, the turning forces disappate...and the skier is now said to be "unweighted" - it doesnt mean the skis need to leave the snow.

 

Having said that...if the skis do indeed leave the snow...there is nothing wrong with that really....however in racing, and racing schools of thought, it is frowned upon simply because being in air means the next turn cant start until touch down...and that is ultimatley slower then if you can start the next turn straight away.

post #15 of 28

"Of course, you will note, Davenport's skis are actually in the air when he intiates on at least one of those turns...so that kinda kills the passive idea."

 

Nothing like getting some air under your skis and regrouping when things get a little wild.

Upper body rotation with a heavy pack is suicidal.

Still, as sailors say "any port in a storm"

Most big mountain skiers that I see are masters of whatever technique they need to make it work.

Nothing like the refinement or racing where milliseconds matter.

post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

 

 

 dont know who this guy is but....

Yeah right SD :-D 

post #17 of 28

SD72,

 

You should run for Prime Minister.  You falsely insinuate that I mentioned (or think) that Davenport uses upper body rotation.  You engage in a flawed syllogism in your last paragraph (false dichotomy) to dodge the unpleasant truth that neither of these guys is steering his legs.  And then with a wink you proceed to lie ("don't know who this guy is")  You libel an individual who is no longer able to participate on this forum or respond to you ... in large part due to your persistent effort to drive him from the forum ... , you place false words in his mouth, and you call him names.  You sound like a world class politician to me, PM72.

post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpedges View Post

SD72,

 

You should run for Prime Minister.  You falsely insinuate that I mentioned (or think) that Davenport uses upper body rotation.  You engage in a flawed syllogism in your last paragraph (false dichotomy) to dodge the unpleasant truth that neither of these guys is steering his legs.  And then with a wink you proceed to lie ("don't know who this guy is")  You libel an individual who is no longer able to participate on this forum or respond to you ... in large part due to your persistent effort to drive him from the forum ... , you place false words in his mouth, and you call him names.  You sound like a world class politician to me, PM72.


Run for PM?  I like the sound of that!

 

Not steering their legs huh?  So what is causing them to turn like that?  Call it what you will....we can call it "jabbawalkie" if you like...its still the same move and skill as ILS.  If I am wrong...show me...explain what is happening in that video of the mystery skier...how is it that his upper body is pointed more or less down the hill, yet his legs turn back and forth?  Explain please.  You have our full attention.

 

As for your other stuff....  I assume your mean my referecnes to Larry501...when did I call him names?  Or put words in his mouth?  His posts are all still here for anyone to see and read. Nothing has been deleted to my knowledge. I am not using his actual screen name for obvious reasons..but my choosen sydonem is hardly disrespectful.  As for me driving him from this forum...nothing could be futher from the truth...I actually defended him not once but twice when he was about to get tossed...dont beleive me?  Ask him. 

post #19 of 28

duel.gif

post #20 of 28
I would have said SD72 defended Mr501 more than twice by my recollection, but I could certainly remember it wrong.

So if not by steering, how does the mystery skier do that?
post #21 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post

I would have said SD72 defended Mr501 more than twice by my recollection, but I could certainly remember it wrong.
So if not by steering, how does the mystery skier do that?

  Knee angulation/steering?

post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgeib View Post

I would have said SD72 defended Mr501 more than twice by my recollection, but I could certainly remember it wrong.
So if not by steering, how does the mystery skier do that?

He rotates the femurs in the hip socket, but he calls it CA. He doesn't do active steering, but the CA is an "active movement and takes real effort to achieve". Hm, confusing isn't it.

 

He is also known for storing energy in the ski and releasing it later in the turn. Hm. Sounds like a subject that deserves banning somewhere.

 

IMO the mystery man is a very good skier and he has challenged a lot of existing dogma, and often rightfully so, but to do it with other dogma. C'Mon

post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

 

Of course they do....all skiers unweight to change direction.

 

Be careful thou...and understand "unweight" might not mean what you think it does...ie we can have 100% of our weight on the skis...and still be "unweighted".wink.gif

 

 

 

 

For clarity - as we make a turn - turning forces start to act on the skier - we call this "Weighted"...when we release the turn or allow the skis to flatten, the turning forces disappate...and the skier is now said to be "unweighted" - it doesnt mean the skis need to leave the snow.

 

Having said that...if the skis do indeed leave the snow...there is nothing wrong with that really....however in racing, and racing schools of thought, it is frowned upon simply because being in air means the next turn cant start until touch down...and that is ultimatley slower then if you can start the next turn straight away.

Probably the best example of where I ski by ILS alone is when I am carving turns in a NASTAR course while in a high tuck.

If I understand what a pure ILS turn is, then tucked turns are it.

You can't do anything but roll your femurs laterally in their sockets when tucked.

 

I don't like the definition you give to the "weighted" term.

I think it is confusing and mixes two concepts.

I prefer to talk about pressuring and weighting to describe the complex dynamics of a turn process where the skis might well be in the air (unweighted) before pressure applied to the skis causes them to arc and generate centripetal forces.

post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post
I don't like the definition you give to the "weighted" term.

I think it is confusing and mixes two concepts.

I prefer to talk about pressuring and weighting to describe the complex dynamics of a turn process where the skis might well be in the air (unweighted) before pressure applied to the skis causes them to arc and generate centripetal forces.

Well, I dont think our def are actually that different...because if you are in the air...then you are not turning, thus no turning forces....hence - unweighted...if you are on skis flat...you are not turning...hence - unweighted.

 

 

It actually brings clarity...because every "turn set" has an unweighted phase (transition) and a weighted phase (the actual turning part). If we required the skis to be airborne to be "unweighted" then most turn sets would be weighted the whole time...which makes the term then rather useless.

 

For clarity that definition is the formal CSIA one...like all things from the CSIA, its also the definition the dictionary uses!

 

 

weight·ed  (wamacr.gifprime.giftibreve.gifd)

adj.
1. Made heavy or heavier by the addition of something: a weighted base.
2. Statistics Adjusted to reflect value or proportion: a weighted average.

 

 

 

In this case the skier is made "heavier" by the addition of turning forces...or Gs...when they dissappear...ie no longer turning...those turning forces are gone...thus we are "unweighted".

 

For interest I also looked up "unweight" the def surprised me!!!!!!

 

un·weight  (ubreve.gifn-wamacr.giftprime.gif)

tr.v. un·weight·ed, un·weight·ing, un·weights
To reduce the pressure on (a ski) by shifting one's weight in order to execute a turn.
 
 
I didn't edit that!  Anyway...when we cease turning...the pressure is reduced....so...unweighted.
 
 
The dictionary is your friend.

Edited by Skidude72 - 11/30/12 at 5:52am
post #25 of 28

How do you catagorize a hop turn where the turning is done in the air.

The skis are unweighted but the turning is done in the air.

Momentum is unchanged during the hop and pressure on the skis after landing (edge set) redirects the momentum in the new direction.

post #26 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by dakine View Post

How do you catagorize a hop turn where the turning is done in the air.

The skis are unweighted but the turning is done in the air.

Momentum is unchanged during the hop and pressure on the skis after landing (edge set) redirects the momentum in the new direction.

 

What categorise it is a hop turn.

 

 

But that is not the point...or perhaps it is.  All these "this is that turn, and that is a this turn" is BS.  Learn skiing fundamentals...with those you can analyse anyone, anytime, doing anything on skis.  It allows you to view skiing as spectrums, and it all get clearer, and your analysis far more accurate.  If you try to put everything into boxes you will end up with an infinite number of boxes (literally) because of the true spectrum nature of skiing.

 

Classic example the recent Cross-over vs Cross-under thread.  I have alwasy struggled to see the value in these terms as this is a spectrum as well, and so many people here saw them as a this vs. that.  It aint.  As a result these terms or "classiifcations" didnt aid, they hindered and have many people going down the wrong path for a long time.  (BB did a  good post over there, and one in the Iconoclastic thread on this explaining the spectrum). 

 

Understand what unweighting, and weighting is, understand that all turn sets need both....then its easy.  The hop turn is easy to see the unweighting phase because it is so dramatic...but you also know now, that unweighting can be achieved by just rolling the skis to flat...much more efficeint...different technnqiue?  Not really one is just using a more pronounced (down the spectrum) unweight then the other...likely from a strong extension (lets say his skis leave the snow by 10cm), another guy extends to unweight (and his skis leave the snow by 5cm), another guy extends to unweight (but his skis stay on the snow), another guy doesnt extend at all to unweight (and his skis stay on the snow), and another guy flexes slightly to unweight (his skis stay on the snow), another guy flexes alot to unweight (his skis stay on the snow).....

 

is this 9 different turns and concepts?  Or one turn, one concept...just along a specturm? 

 

Skiiing is only as complicated as we choose to make it.  My advice - make it simple.  It will benefit you, and your students and peers.

post #27 of 28

Simple?

On Epic Ski before the season really has started?

Get a grip, this is the internet.

Actually, it is pretty easy to spot a flaw in someones skiing but it is really hard to describe how to do it right.

post #28 of 28

Here is what I notice in the Chris Davenport Antarctica clip.  I see them looking down something very steep with butterflies in their stomachs.  They can evision becoming shark food as they freeze to death sinking to the bottom of Davey Jone's locker if they make a mistake. As such they don't have as much flow into their turns as a result of intimidation.  No frikin way I would ski it.  That looks like 50-60 degrees or so and wind blown slab to boot.  To me, initiation looks like a slight rotation beginning at the feet to insure adequate anticipation which is followed by an extension up in order to get a good controlled pivot around towards the fall line to insure a slicing edge that will hold. It's hard to really finish a turn on that steepness and not be in the back seat due to not having enough inside ankle flex.  I have been on that steepness and the adrenaline really flows when you just can't shorten the inside leg any more to accomodate the pitch of the slope and have to lean out with a slight diverge at the tips.  The rotation at the feet  and extension negates some of that backseat problem.  Nice job to minimize vertical drop and time in the fall line until they can see the whole run.  Managing risk instead of showboating for the camera is just plain smart.

 

Antarctica by motorsailor/passagemaker is dangerous by itself let along a climb to ski that.  Gives me the hebejebies. Given the situation and butterfiies its an astounding tatctical adaptation requiring orders of magnitude more than text book ski instructor turns.  Looking down that, given the remoteness and no chance of help, I would feel like I was at the edge of the Grand Canyon and some AH just came up behind me and grabed me by hips with a little push and said "Got cha".  

 

In the unknown skier clip, I thinks he's doing a good job of short radius turns and doing pretty much what he says he is doing despite the steering in there.  I won't besmirch the unamed skier in the clip as I think there is a certain segment of the skiing population that prefers his approach and he gets results. Insisting he conform to dogma seems rigid.  

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 › Do you see any new big mountain ski techniques emerging?