EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Flexion, extension and rotation... are these mechanics?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flexion, extension and rotation... are these mechanics? - Page 2

post #31 of 40

So, if I'm correct you're saying that ALWAYS rotating only from the hip socket is not always functional?  Being an avid BC and free skier trying to adapt to the "leg rotation in the hip socket" thing is a bit frustrating.  I truly think it needs to be defined better by PSIA.  There is active and passive leg rotation, both of which have their functions at different times.  When I'm RR tracking it feels very passive.  When I need to jam on a turn to avoid a big trough in the bumps it feels more active.  You cannot turn your foot without rotating your leg.  I believe the answer to your question is not whether rotating and flexion / extension is bio-mechanical, but to what degree of everyday use.   Unless you are standing on two bar stools there aren't too many feelings like twisting your leg in the femur from the middle of your foot.  That's another reason I don't see it as a functional way to ski ALL THE TIME. 

post #32 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Davis View Post

I was told today by my examiners that rotation is not part of the mechanics skiing. ...

 

I also learned today there is only one way to fix erroneous use of non-mechanical rotation: movement in the direction of the new turn.

 

Eliminating unwanted rotation can not affect movement in the direction of the new turn.

 

This too confuses me. 

This post is very confusing to me too. It sounds like a classic semantics problem. "mechanics skiing" "non-mechanical rotation" "unwanted rotation" are not terms used in PSIA publications. We do have terms like "bio-mechanics", "active rotation", "passive rotation" and "ineffective rotary movements". The "Visual Cues" document defines rotary movement as "involve turning some part of the body relative to other parts" and notes that "Combined with other skills, rotary movements allow the skier to change direction more efficiently". Ineffective rotary movements include examples like "the shoulders/torso initiate the turning of the skis", or "one ski stems or steps to begin the turn". Until you can get a clear definition of terms that includes specific bio mechanical movements like the examples in ineffective movements above it is going to be hard to clear up the confusion.

 

Our joints can either hinge, rotate or both. The knee joint does not rotate (at least without damage resulting), but it does hinge. The hips can either rotate or hinge or both. Rotary movement of a joint is bio-mechanics. Rotary movements are part of skiing. Some rotary movements are efficient, some aren't. Some inefficient movements can be useful (or fun) in certain situations. 

post #33 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Davis View Post

I was told today by my examiners that rotation is not part of the mechanics skiing. ...

 

I also learned today there is only one way to fix erroneous use of non-mechanical rotation: movement in the direction of the new turn.

 

Eliminating unwanted rotation can not affect movement in the direction of the new turn.

 

This too confuses me. 

This post is very confusing to me too. It sounds like a classic semantics problem. "mechanics skiing" "non-mechanical rotation" "unwanted rotation" are not terms used in PSIA publications. We do have terms like "bio-mechanics", "active rotation", "passive rotation" and "ineffective rotary movements". The "Visual Cues" document defines rotary movement as "involve turning some part of the body relative to other parts" and notes that "Combined with other skills, rotary movements allow the skier to change direction more efficiently". Ineffective rotary movements include examples like "the shoulders/torso initiate the turning of the skis", or "one ski stems or steps to begin the turn". Until you can get a clear definition of terms that includes specific bio mechanical movements like the examples in ineffective movements above it is going to be hard to clear up the confusion.

 

Our joints can either hinge, rotate or both. The knee joint does not rotate (at least without damage resulting), but it does hinge. The hips can either rotate or hinge or both. Rotary movement of a joint is bio-mechanics. Rotary movements are part of skiing. Some rotary movements are efficient, some aren't. Some inefficient movements can be useful (or fun) in certain situations. 


If I can take a stab at this,

Unwanted rotary would be upper rotary movements that are in the opposite direction of the direction of travel and are not a part of the mechanics of skiing as described in the tech manual, and that the fix for such "upper rotary" movements is to stabilize the upper body and keep it moving in the intended direction of travel creating a counter for the legs to turn independently against. The desired effect is independent leg rotation vs body rotation. The original description by Bryan Davis was "I was told by the Examiners that "rotation" is not part of the mechanics of skiing", The statement is true if meant to explain the proper center line skills from the manual. Upper (rotary) is a gross body movement and not a standard. That is my take here.

 

P.S. I'll bet Bryan was taking the cert II exam, just a hunch. Watch out for the mine field, keep it simple.

 

Cheers

 

Barry

post #34 of 40

There are a lot of ways one could take this. But when one is not using the exact terminology from the manuals and not being specific, then all bets are off.  So far, we can only guess about where the conversation was intended to go. Talking about Centerline is dating yourself.

post #35 of 40

I guess then that I must be time tested.
 

post #36 of 40
Guys... The OP doesn't want help or clarification. He only wants to bitch and whine.
post #37 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrudBuster View Post

So, if I'm correct you're saying that ALWAYS rotating only from the hip socket is not always functional?  Being an avid BC and free skier trying to adapt to the "leg rotation in the hip socket" thing is a bit frustrating.  I truly think it needs to be defined better by PSIA.  There is active and passive leg rotation, both of which have their functions at different times.  When I'm RR tracking it feels very passive.  When I need to jam on a turn to avoid a big trough in the bumps it feels more active.  You cannot turn your foot without rotating your leg.  I believe the answer to your question is not whether rotating and flexion / extension is bio-mechanical, but to what degree of everyday use.   Unless you are standing on two bar stools there aren't too many feelings like twisting your leg in the femur from the middle of your foot.  That's another reason I don't see it as a functional way to ski ALL THE TIME. 


Skiing BC without turning the femur in the hip sounds really hard... I see people turn the foot without rotating the leg all the time, it's a question of what is turning against what or not.

post #38 of 40
Thread Starter 
Tetonpwdrjunkie you should read posts completely.
I thank everyone who has added valuable commentary. Those comments have helped clarify my original questions.
post #39 of 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Davis View Post

Tetonpwdrjunkie you should read posts completely.
I thank everyone who has added valuable commentary. Those comments have helped clarify my original questions.

So I guess it was only my posts that you objected to? FYI I spent some time and effort on those posts in an attempt to help you out. I felt like it was more than unappreciated based on your response. That's OK. You can't help everyone. Just so you understand where I'm coming from, I get paid to give out advice on skiing and I work almost everyday. People pay about $1.50/minute for my time for this information and I get a lot of repeat business and good tips. I spend a significant amount of my free time handing out information on this site for free and I feel like I get shit on a fair amount of the time. I think that's why there are so few real pros posting here and why the ask a ski pro section is failing.

Trust me... I do read all of the posts in the threads I comment on.
post #40 of 40
Thread Starter 
Professional responses are appreciated.
To summarize on tue mechanics issue, most agree some sort of rotation (affecting the skis) is a mechanical part of skiing. There seems to be some disallowance of undesirable rotation. I submit this is still involved as a primary part of the mechanics of skiing, albeit ineffective or detrimental to the intended outcome.
Regarding "blending of skills": I maintain alteration of one skill is highly likely to affect, if not required modification of, other skills. I do concur that the ability to isolate and affect these skills are an element of a skillful skier.
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 › Flexion, extension and rotation... are these mechanics?