or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Technical Free Skiing Videos
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Technical Free Skiing Videos - Page 7

post #181 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune View Post

foot steering works.
z
I too, when not in a 'locked carve' turn, don't feel like I am twisting my feet, but rather manage the pressure and edging to steer/turn the skis.
Another question I have - the way I understood the concept of steering in a carved turn is maintaining some twisting pressure inside the boot, during the turn, to, I guess, add some more momentum/pressure/dig the tips into the snow more/help the skis turn more... because during normal turns, the edge angles are well, above 45/60/80, so any such pressure does not directly turn the skis...

Is this what is meant by steering? At least in a racing context? I understand that sometimes you unload the skis and steer/turn them in the air, but that's rather an exception to regular carved turns.
post #182 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post

Another question I have - the way I understood the concept of steering in a carved turn is maintaining some twisting pressure inside the boot, during the turn, to, I guess, add some more momentum/pressure/dig the tips into the snow more/help the skis turn more.

 

40 yr old advice. Modern equipment doesn't need it.

post #183 of 495

The way I understand steering is that is done primarily with leg rotation, femurs in the hip sockets.  

post #184 of 495

Here are the types of conditions where Heluva would want a powder ski. 

 

 

post #185 of 495
no,razie, steeringis rotating the femur in its socket,ie pivoting the skis unser the boot.

any short turns wil involve pivoting.
racers do it too.
post #186 of 495
i agree that it is something not often used consciously much in racing or otherwise...and my intent was certainly not to imply so.
nec, in answer to your question of where, i would answer during "finishiation" if at all.
razie, it has to do with something i learned here on epic. but first, an experiment: lets say for the sake of the argument that while standing still, in your house or whatever, that your right leg represents your outside leg in a ski turn. now while standing, lift that leg and watch what happens as you turn that foot laterally (towards the outside of your body)...you should observe that it tips towards the big toe "edge". next, do the same with your left foot (your "inside ski") rotating it inwards, towards your body. you should observe this foot tipping towards the little toe "edge". these can also be observed when lifting our legs and rotating our femurs as we stand. rotate the right inwards (simulating rolling on edge) causes our right foot to rotate outwards, when we tip the left leg outwards, the foot rotates inwards. the effects are subtle, but they are there. if i had more time, id keep going, but i brought it up because someone here mentioned rotary. for further explanation search for "a tale of three turns" here on epic...skip to page 12 and read from there.

zenny:)
post #187 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

Here are the types of conditions where Heluva would want a powder ski. 
I think that was general questioning, not specific to these videos. Ligety would have gotten the same question from spin.






[/quote]
post #188 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune View Post

i agree that it is something not often used consciously much in racing or otherwise...and my intent was certainly not to imply so.
nec, in answer to your question of where, i would answer during "finishiation" if at all.
razie, it has to do with something i learned here on epic. but first, an experiment: lets say for the sake of the argument that while standing still, in your house or whatever, that your right leg represents your outside leg in a ski turn. now while standing, lift that leg and watch what happens as you turn that foot laterally (towards the outside of your body)...you should observe that it tips towards the big toe "edge". next, do the same with your left foot (your "inside ski") rotating it inwards, towards your body. you should observe this foot tipping towards the little toe "edge". these can also be observed when lifting our legs and rotating our femurs as we stand. rotate the right inwards (simulating rolling on edge) causes our right foot to rotate outwards, when we tip the left leg outwards, the foot rotates inwards. the effects are subtle, but they are there. if i had more time, id keep going, but i brought it up because someone here mentioned rotary. for further explanation search for "a tale of three turns" here on epic...skip to page 12 and read from there.

zenny:)

 

The triplanar action of the ankle/foot joint complex that you describe (and which has been soundly beaten by Bud Heishman among others here) comes into play in open chain kinetic activities. In closed chain kinetic activities, like normal skiing, in which the foot is on the snow, the rotation moves up the chain and manifests in good skiers as pelvic counter - the basic purpose of counteracting is in fact to prevent tipping of the feet from being accompanied by their also twisting.

 

No-one is denying that skiers can twist their legs and feet deliberately. Most do, often accompanied by upper body rotation as well. I think that really good skiers, however, primarily use edge control and pressure modulation to control the action of their skis on the snow and that rotation occurs as a reaction to this. Others may view it differently.

post #189 of 495
agreed, harddays regarding pressure/edging control! just thought it was worth mentioning. smile.gif
zenny
post #190 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardDaysNight View Post

 

the basic purpose of counteracting is in fact to prevent tipping of the feet from being accompanied by their also twisting.

 

 

So I have read, but what I wonder, isn´t this counteracting really the same as rotating the femur in the hip socket to accompany the foot joint movement? If not, what is the difference?

post #191 of 495
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt View Post

 

So I have read, but what I wonder, isn´t this counteracting really the same as rotating the femur in the hip socket to accompany the foot joint movement? If not, what is the difference?


Active versus passive. In the passive example, the skis are turning themselves while the body counter acts what the skis are doing. In the active example, the feet are twisting the skis and rotate the femurs in the hip sockets. Think of the two ways to do pivot slips - one by turning the feet and the other by edging/pressure... similar outcomes but quite different [active] inputs.

post #192 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeluvaSkier View Post


Active versus passive. In the passive example, the skis are turning themselves while the body counter acts what the skis are doing. In the active example, the feet are twisting the skis and rotate the femurs in the hip sockets. Think of the two ways to do pivot slips - one by turning the feet and the other by edging/pressure... similar outcomes but quite different [active] inputs.

 

I was just about to reply with a lengthy, and boring, blurb but Helavu has saved me from myself!

post #193 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post


Is this what is meant by steering? At least in a racing context? I understand that sometimes you unload the skis and steer/turn them in the air, but that's rather an exception to regular carved turns.

Steering in any context means what it does in the dictionary.  The ability to direct your course of travel.

 

In skiing we can do that one of three ways (or indeed all three in one turn as the case may be):

 

  1. Pivoting
  2. Increasing/decreasing edge angle
  3. Manipulating fore/aft pressure distribution.

 

 

You can do 2 and 3 in a pure carve.

 

Regarding 1 and "active vs. passive".  This is a ridiculous distinciton created a few years ago by HH after it became public knowledge that coaches at his clinics where teaching pivoting.  He desparatley needed a way to still be "different", so this active/passive idea was created.  Its bunk.  Everyone does both: we must.  Racers will somtimes pivot for a "stivot", with the ski sometimes in the air...ergo, it must be active....and TTS will be passive, even at the never ever lesson once the skis get some steering angle and the skis self steering effect takes over.  The key is understanding what makes a good pivot, and that is having the pivot point under the foot...

post #194 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 

OK, so truth is, I feel that really high level skiers do a pivot slip through edge control and pressure modulation and not through active twisting of the legs. I know there are those who feel that pivot slip is passe because it is active rotary, but when I do them, that's not what I am feeling. Maybe this is another thread...

 

If you're not turning your legs in a pivot slip, how do you keep your skis within a ski width corridor?

post #195 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

Steering in any context means what it does in the dictionary

 

Twenty years ago Witherell wrote that he reviewed a hundred definitions of steering. He adopted a definition that stated something like pressure and tipping first and then anything else that applied a rotary input to the ski was steering.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skidude72 View Post

Regarding 1 and "active vs. passive".  This is a ridiculous distinciton created a few years ago by HH after it became public knowledge that coaches at his clinics where teaching pivoting.  He desparatley needed a way to still be "different", so this active/passive idea was created.  Its bunk.  

 

 

Time for a history lesson. Witherell wrote about the active-passive distinction 20+ years ago, when HH was on the PSIA D-Team which was years before his clinics. Witherell and HH use reversed definitions of active and passive but both agree that if you teach rotary your skiing will rely on rotary - and not in a good way. Witherell says something like students don't need to learn rotary they need to unlearn it! The long and short of it is that Witherell like Harb believes that rotary is something skiers do instinctively and balancing on edges is not. Fascinating that they are both race coaches that recreational instructors prefer to ignore. 

post #196 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

Twenty years ago Witherell wrote that he reviewed a hundred definitions of steering. He adopted a definition that stated something like pressure and tipping first and then anything else that applied a rotary input to the ski was steering.



Time for a history lesson. Witherell wrote about the active-passive distinction 20+ years ago, when HH was on the PSIA D-Team which was years before his clinics. Witherell and HH use reversed definitions of active and passive but both agree that if you teach rotary your skiing will rely on rotary - and not in a good way. Witherell says something like students don't need to learn rotary they need to unlearn it! The long and short of it is that Witherell like Harb believes that rotary is something skiers do instinctively and balancing on edges is not. Fascinating that they are both race coaches that recreational instructors prefer to ignore. 

And fascinating that they're addressing the pre-stivot era. Oh well... Pianta Su!
post #197 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post


And fascinating that they're addressing the pre-stivot era. Oh well... Pianta Su!

 

Stivots fit within what Witherell wrote. WC racers have stated they it happens "naturally" when needed.


Edited by NECoach - 4/17/13 at 6:50pm
post #198 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post

If you're not turning your legs in a pivot slip, how do you keep your skis within a ski width corridor?
C'mon, that's an extreme case. A proper corridor for SL training would be 4-5m wide... where you don't need to pivot. In a SL course, you have just 3m but you also have 10-12m down, again you don't really need to pivot...
post #199 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post

If you're not turning your legs in a pivot slip, how do you keep your skis within a ski width corridor?
C'mon, that's an extreme case. A proper corridor for SL training would be 4-5m wide... where you don't need to pivot. In a SL course, you have just 3m but you also have 10-12m down, again you don't really need to pivot...
post #200 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphor_ View Post

 

If you're not turning your legs in a pivot slip, how do you keep your skis within a ski width corridor?

 

There's a difference between your legs turning and you turning your legs.

post #201 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 

There's a difference between your legs turning and you turning your legs.

 

Can't it be a combination of both?  Pressure and leg movement working together...

post #202 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

 

There's a difference between your legs turning and you turning your legs.

 

So true!

post #203 of 495

   Either way, stivots ARE used in racing...They are not something that is done by the racer out of a bad habit in his or her skiing..True, they may be needed due to a tactical error, but this is not always the case. A good skier knows how to use rotation properly (as skidude said, it's about the pivot point). Therefore, I don't understand why it is something that some think should be "swept under the rug" as if it didn't exist. Why not just teach how it's performed properly and in what context it's applicable?

 

    zenny

post #204 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

 

 

Twenty years ago Witherell wrote that he reviewed a hundred definitions of steering. He adopted a definition that stated something like pressure and tipping first and then anything else that applied a rotary input to the ski was steering.

 

 

WW is entitled to use any definitions he likes, but in the modern world, "steering" is as I defined it above....its whats in the dictionary.  Making up your own language to convey ideas is generally not a good idea. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

 

 

Time for a history lesson. Witherell wrote about the active-passive distinction 20+ years ago, when HH was on the PSIA D-Team which was years before his clinics. Witherell and HH use reversed definitions of active and passive but both agree that if you teach rotary your skiing will rely on rotary - and not in a good way. Witherell says something like students don't need to learn rotary they need to unlearn it! The long and short of it is that Witherell like Harb believes that rotary is something skiers do instinctively and balancing on edges is not. Fascinating that they are both race coaches that recreational instructors prefer to ignore. 

 

Huh?  You are making no sense.  So how could one assign an exclusive use of one form of rotary to a school of thought that didnt exist???????

 

Fact is...both forms are part of good skiing...always has been...always will be.  PMTS's accertions that it is the only org that teaches and uses "passive" is absurd.

 

As for rotary being "instintive"....show me where WW wrote that....I dont beleive you.  Regardless thou, there is a difference between a good pivot and a bad one....often this needs to be taught. 

 

 

As for ignoring WW...that is bunk too.  Lots of people read his stuff, and still reference it even today. 

post #205 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

 

I missed the video clip with the deep powder. Which one was it?

 

I'm sure you noticed that I asked about both modern all mountain and powder skis. All mountain because it has bearing on any free skiing other than the pure technical stuff demonstrated. Powder because modern powder skis and the the technique (or tactics if you will) used to drive them optimally are largely the very opposite of hard snow technical skiing.

 

Knowing the full scope of the OP's experience and skill set has bearing on this discussion IMO. Especially when people are claiming the skills demonstrated in the video are directly applicable to all terrain and snow. Which I claim is simply not the case. Don't get me wrong - I've seen folks take that technique into a pretty broad range of conditions, wider than I'd care to try - and look darn strong. But there are limits to how rational or effective that is. It is not a one size fits all universe.

 

I'm very curious about the range of the OP's experience and his opinions about the universality of the technique and gear in the video.

post #206 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

Here are the types of conditions where Heluva would want a powder ski. 

 

Or at least a modern all mountain ski wink.gif

post #207 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

 

Yeppers! And the Blossom's are no slouch in the all mountain department on the feet of a skilled skier like the OP.

 

They are antique designs in that context of true (IMO) all mountain skiing. No matter whose feet they are on.  A whole lot has been learned about modern ski designs since the Spatula mutation was introduced into the gene pool. And those Blossom's seem to show none of that learning. Am I missing something? Is there some form of clever rocker they do not talk about? Am I blind to the use of early taper? 

 

It seems a glaring conceit of both PMTS and much of the race community in general that if you can just perfect your one hammer head on your one hammer handle, then all the world will magically morph into nails. 

post #208 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbm13 View Post

There's nothing old school about his equipment; it's cutting edge RD product.  His focus is on highlevel race technique, therefore his equipment is the logical choice for his goals.  Don't take a knife to a gun fight..LOL

 

"Cutting edge RD product"  an oxymoronic statement in the context of the non-race world. Race gear is both specialized and regulated. And race derived slightly more generalized gear is, just that - slightly more generalized. And often lacking much or all of the learning of the past decade.

 

Only in the context of race courses or specialized "technical skiing" can you make a case that this is "modern" equipment. In the context of modern all mountain skiing - it is positively antiquated in terms of design. I don't care who you try to hold up as a counter-example - it is just a fact. Those who choose to ski on old designs, from recreational skiers to clinicians and everything in-between,  do so for many reasons. That's fine. But let's not confuse personal preference or comfort zone or nostalgia or basic conservatism with the state of the wider universe and current design understanding. If a video is being posted as an example - being crystal clear about the goal and the limits is a good thing. And not overstating the applicability of the technique or the gear to other goals or terrain or snow conditions is also a good idea. Just my .02 

post #209 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by NECoach View Post

 

Stivots fit within what Witherell wrote. WC racers have stated they it happens "naturally" when needed.

 

And that would be the skill set you say is unnecessary. But if it happens 'naturally'... because we all know what a 'natural' sport skiing is and how simply movements are mastered.

post #210 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by spindrift View Post

 

Or at least a modern all mountain ski wink.gif

 

So, enlighten us, what exactly is a "modern" all-mountain ski? I'm guessing it involves lots of rocker. Some people actually like to be able to use the tips, in all terrain. It does not make them less "modern" of a 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 › Technical Free Skiing Videos