LF, here is what you wrote,
This creates the often discussed "shoulders level" angulated position (hopefully progressive, not parked). A number of drills have been suggested to help the student who already owns ILS and inside leg initiations to accomplish strong angulation, so that the weight is directed to the outside ski. Drills area also mentioned that help sensitize the student to what the upper body is doing (ex: poles tucked under elbows, Travolta/Schlopys, pole pull, etc) as the legs move independently. Such drills help students become aware of when they have "Shoulders Level" or not.
The level shoulders stuff is just an incidental outcome of dropping the hips into the turn ( flexing the hips and waist laterally) but it is hardly a focus and imposes an arbitrary limit on our RoM.
Ligety exceeds the range available with this arbitrary constraint. Suggesting to me the strict adoption of the mantra of level body parts is really no different than the old ski like Stein stuff. Jolbert shook the establishment by say the best all ski similarly and that doesn't resemble what was being taught at the time. Form over function was called into question and that is what I am doing here.
You also wrote,
I'll add "go bowlegged" to this list of ways to conceptualize releasing the new inside ski. "Topple" into the new turn onto a newly weighted LTE comes to my mind as well, should the dynamics be notable. Initiating a turn with inside foot tipping and inside knee flexing helps to eliminate sequential initiations in the student who already owns independent leg steering.
A sequential release is a sequential release. Inside or outside first doesn't matter much, both are sequential releases. Weight being mostly on the outside ski prior to the release then having to add weight after the edge change seems odd. Review Barnes turn graphics and pay close attention to how weight shifts foot to foot as a function of centripetal forces, not an active unweighting and reweighting of that inside ski.
Finally you wrote,
Teach femur rotation first, with the legs turning under a non-turning pelvis.
and later in the same post you wrote,
In order to direct most of the weight to the outside ski, one needs to elevate &/or project forward the new inside hip (and inside shoulder and inside arm along with it).
Don't turn it, turn it to create counter? Which is it LF?
I'm not trying to bust your chops here as much as spur your thinking and helping you see how simple ideas like a strong inside half stands on it's own. Core stability and keeping the inside half involved in the turn is more than enough for that inside half to accomplish. The ILS produces inside half lead and is related but once that half is leading it 's role becomes maintaining inside half balance and that is a pretty big task. As far as simultaneous edge releases and edge changes, it's a function of the feet and the core moving along their separate paths. Those paths diverge, converge and cross. We can vary the path either part follows but getting them to converge would require either the feet to turn further across the hill than the body, or the body to follow a path that is more directly down the hill. The amount of either that we use depends on the turn we desire. Which implies we use both and releasing the core towards the new turn thus becomes an objective and the skis releasing later must also be an objective. So the hips have to have moved (back over the skis) prior to rolling the skis over to the other edges. Which leads me to question the ankle roll as the true trigger for anything more than releasing both skis together. Said simply, the edge release down at the snow simply cannot be the trigger for the new turn since the rest of the body is already in the new turn. That is the Achilles heel of that mantra and is why I suggested the origins were in helping someone become more active down in the feet.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 6/20/13 at 11:18am