JASP, JASP, JASP, you are getting way too defensive here. I'll try to "step up to the plate" and share as you suggested. Oops! you also suggested I "stop writing so much". Given these contradicting directives, what am I going to do to please you? So, let me take the liberty to add "color and contrast" as you originally suggested with a pre-amble, a ski discussion, and a money-backed offer (I like to put my money where my mouth is).
After I asked a few questions, you suggested I had some nefarious motive. I think I cleared that up pretty well. Then you moved on to the funny assertion that I claimed I am a ski authority. Since I had the impression that you are someone high up and influential in some organizations, not a person with poor reading skill, I thought adding "I don't mean this, I don't mean that" would be superfluous and distracting to the conversation. But to be fair, my writing, especially on an internet forum, is not always clear. It is understandable to me that you could honestly misinterpret it when you were being defensive and pissed off at what I wrote. Allow me to walk you through what I wrote. By indicating skiing is not so far from my field (which is not the same as "being within my field" or having expertise as you interpreted) I mean I have the intellectual wherewithal to ask questions about skiing and to evaluate the answers for myself without having to accept ideas and concepts about skiing as a matter of faith. In contrast, if a high-energy physicist says xyz and another abc, I wouldn't be able to tell which one is right. A more colorful illustration is cooking. I can't cook jack. I guess many on here are not expert cooks either. But no Iron chefs, Michelin-starred cooks can put a plate of chicken crap in front of us and call it chicken salad with some fancy cooking theory or terminologies. Intellectual understanding is no guarantee of correct physical execution. I understand what Saunders and Barnes say in their thread on moguls, but I can't do what they say (yet). But if you claim that skiing is such an intellectually advanced subject, the understanding or appreciation of the mechanics involved is beyond the grasp of an intermediate with a reasonable education in engineering or physics and will have to be taken for granted on the basis of credentials, then I disagree.
I am not saying you make that claim. I don't know if you believe it, just as I don't know for sure if some of what you wrote is correct (and therefore my questions). But your supercillious atttitude and habit of throwing out your credentials instead of drilling down on the substance don't inspire confidence and respect. May I remind you that Bernie Maddof had very impressive credentials and got a lot money from savvy investors and institutions to do his "investing" before he was handcuffed. Now, don't get worked up and say I claim you are a fraud. I am not. I don't know you. I just want to make sure the logic is clear since you missed my intention, my point (hopefully not deliberately) quite badly before.
Moving on to weight transfer. What I do is transfering weight from the old outside ski at the end of the turn to the new outside ski a la Lito Tejada-Flores Early Weight Shift (is it ok to mention him here?) I don't consciously do anything more elaborate or two-footed. It works well for me. The skis don't feel hooky at all. I have to tip hard to make them hook more which I like. I guess this is the old school technique that people did on straight skis. At first my weight transfer was pretty jerky. "Lurching from ski to ski" was a comment made by someone here which helped me do better. I don't know whether or how two-footed is better. Or what adaptations in technique specifically for the new skis will make the turn better. I used to lose balance to the inside, but adding agulation (I think that the terminology here) I am doing much better now.
I don't know what you teach or champion. When I asked for clarification, your reaction, ahem, does not make it any clearer to me. Therefore I can't really take a shot at a logic-based comparison of relative merits. I am going to provide my own experience as an illustration which I suspect is quite commonplace. But for completeness, and I hate to disappoint your call to step up. Here we go. From time to time I ski with a group of people many of whom take a lot of group lessons, some a few private as well. They ski very two footed. The image of a golf cart is an apt description. By their own admission, I ski a lot better than them, by far. I was never really interested in which school, which affilliation their training was from (I was focusing on my own problems) and cannot say whether their training had anything to do with your teaching, ideas, concepts or your organization. A number of things can explain the difference in the quality of our skiing. I am more fanatic and think a lot more about skiing. I probably ski a few days more each season too. But if I have to do a Pareto chart for the dominant factor in our difference, I will say it is the one-footed skiing I do that they don't or can't. Of course, surely, certainly, they and I ski crappily compared to what I see in the videos here. And I want to ski better and better. I come here with a completely open mind to explore - but statements, opinions, ideas have to make sense to me. When they don't (re skiing), I ask questions, I don't say right off the bat, as I am prone to do in my own profession, that they are dumb or nonsense. So, I was a bit surprised at your reaction.
Because of training and habit, I always look for explanation. I will attempt to explain your reaction, to "add more color and contrast" as you suggested, with a full disclosure that I have no training whatsoever in psychology. Here we go. When I first joined Epic there was a huge back and forth "discussion" between the blah blah blah school and many ski instructors here. Things got heated, insults hurled, and people banned. Followers of the "mystery skier" essentially argued that PSIA methods, techniques, and ideas were ineffective if not downright bad. Ignoring the often over-the-top charges, unreasonable generalization, and some un-called for mockery of you, your colleagues, and organization, these folks were technically rigorous, but also rigid as I subsequently learned, to a newbie like me. They put up videos; they critiqued others' skiing and created a strong impression that they knew what they were talking about while you were fluffing. Impression can be wrong, and I sincerely hope this one is because it would be too sad otherwise. I guess that period had made you very defensive and suspcious of anyone asking questions that may be taken as challenging your authority, eh?
You throw out a lot of credentials, implied references to your standing in the ski industry which are all irrelevant here because I never asked WHO you were to say what you said. I merely asked WHY. You remind me of the image of a general with a chest full of medals earned by politicking in peacetime whose peacocking collapses at the first shot of battle. I don't say this to be mean, JASP. I just want you to come across as a truly solid leader and instructor deserving the respect your credentials and standing suggest. Again, I don't know you and you may be Herman Meier in disguise jerking my chain for fun in reality. It's just that your reaction on here gives me the impression you may be one of those clothless emperors I encounter from time to time.
If I am out of bound, hitting too sensitve a nerve, showing insufficient respect to a pillar of Epic, the moderator please send me a note and I will respectfully bow out of this thread. To demonstrate my utter sincerity, if you could find anything I have written here that claims I am a ski expert, or an expert skier, or know more about skiing than anyone here, I will transfer $500 from my Paypal account to Epicski. (I just sold an old-technology lens, and don't need any new high tech toy yet.)
Edited by ChuckT - 12/14/12 at 5:21pm