or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › A simple self-assessment test
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# A simple self-assessment test - Page 17

Just FYI I have a PhD in physics, but in this forum I try to take things back to basics, there isn't really a need to bring in equations, differential equations or 14 minutes university lectures into this discussion. I am also a certified race coach and I have never had to use any complicated physics to explain what is going on.

That is why I asked you a very simple question, "Jack, about conservation of angular momentum. You claim this is the major explanation of speeding up and down. Correct?"

I do understand that different forms of energy exist, but where does the energy go in your hypothesis that angular momentum slows a skier down. If the energy goes into rotational energy surely the skier would be rotating quite a lot? Got video of this rotation?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack97

.... Once the terrain has enuf curvature (bumps), rotational aspect can be applied and throw in "impulse and (linear) momentum" for completeness.

...

Yes, among other things...and then put someone on skis, bike, skateboard, etc. that slide or roll, and yet other variables come into play.  That's why Jamt's three examples a couple posts up don't hold water on a number of levels.  This is again one reason why experience can be so valuable.

Here's a fun one that's not bump-related, but does starkly illustrate that, among other things, if you're on a sliding surface, it can make a difference all of itself:

This again can boil down to, don't pump the face of a bump because you read on the web that it will help you slow down, and, absorption can be a good skill to have on any self-assessment checklist.

What exactly are you trying to demonstrate on that video?  The landing?  Are you trying to say he sucked up the momentum with his landing and deep flexing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook

That's why Jamt's three examples a couple posts up don't hold water on a number of levels.  This is again one reason why experience can be so valuable.

I bet you are not the only one with experience here. I have met a lot of athletes with huge experience who have no clue what is really going on.

In the scientific method you have the steps:

Observation

Hypothesis

Prediction

Experimentation/Testing

Conclusion/analysis

Your observation is that good bumpskiers flex their legs when they go over a bump. You have also observed that good bumpskiers can keep speed under control without skidding.

I am guessing then that your hypothesis is somethings like "In order to control speed in the bumps you need to suck up the legs when you hit a bump"

The next step is prediction, it is a general statement of how you think the phenomenon works. It seems your idea is something like "since there is angular momentum and preservation involved that must be it..."

Next step is experimentation/testing. Best would be if you could build a robot that sucks up the legs in an objective way, or maybe have sensors on a person to see what is actually going on, not his observation of what is going on. In this step I predict you would discover that the hypothesis is wrong, and you can go back and make a new hypothesis.

You actually have some experiements that you can analyse, and that is video. You have tried it but you have not analysed it.

If you cannot verify the hypothesis there is no need to make conclusions/analysis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt

Just FYI I have a PhD in physics, but in this forum I try to take things back to basics, there isn't really a need to bring in equations, differential equations or 14 minutes university lectures into this discussion. I am also a certified race coach and I have never had to use any complicated physics to explain what is going on.

The discussions within this post steered me into this direction (no pun intended), however I do believe other poster do not see some of the distinction within classical mechanics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt

That is why I asked you a very simple question, "Jack, about conservation of angular momentum. You claim this is the major explanation of speeding up and down. Correct?"

Just to be clear, my responses to you has been under the context that conservation of angular momentum is a major way of explaining that moving the com can increase or decrease speed. The way you're posing the question is different than what I have been saying so I will decline to answer in that manner. I will say this, I do believe that anti pumping can slow the decent of a skier downhill path. In addition, I do believe that spreading the impulse over time is another way bumpers slow down on their decent as well as scarving and skidding movements. How much one uses is dependent on their background, intents and desires. Even at the WC bumper levels, I can see differences right now and though out the decades going back to 80s. My reason to just focus on pumping/ anti pumping alone and rotational principles was that they seem to be neglected or mis understood in this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt

I do understand that different forms of energy exist, but where does the energy go in your hypothesis that angular momentum slows a skier down. If the energy goes into rotational energy surely the skier would be rotating quite a lot? Got video of this rotation?

My understanding of the rotational energy is that it goes in or out from the moment of inertia. I have yet to see a derivation that the rotational kinetic energy is conserved in a closed/near closed system. If you have a proof or can point me to one, I would like to see it.

In terms of video, see some of the "failed" youtube of newbies or intermediate skiers going into the bumps. Legs bent but still rigid going into the face (uphill side) of the moguls, majority of the time the skis will jet out from under them. My hypothesis is that this is due to the increase in rotational speed. Advance skiers can keep this in check sine they can rely on skidding. I see this all the time b/c thats where I spend my time in the hill or mountain.

And no, I will not show a vid on this, contrary to some beliefs, I do not get my enjoyment from seeing other people make an idiot of themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook

Priceless.  Parametric and driven oscillation is a pretty real explanation, in the real world.

It really still is surprising to me, though, that the connection between the real world and here can be so fragmented that an inversion of the way pumping and sucking up speed works gets put forth as the reality.

For passive readers, these guys are not on an entry-level pump track, but instead on a dirt-jump setup that is still pumped, so don't see it and think pump tracks are too intimidating to try.  But, it's fun to watch, and the timing of when pressure is exerted is pretty clear in this one (on some lines, you actually see a double-pump, one on the downhill transition and one on the face of the next jump, just as with pumping a halfpipe, but the point is extending on the trannie is what builds speed).

I literally have no idea how you could post that video and still disagree with me, since he is saying the exact same thing I'm saying.  He talks about pressuring the bike with his legs on the downslope of the landing -- ie, the 'downhill' side.  That's where "pumping" with your legs causes you to speed up, because at that point the reaction force from the surface is pushing you forwards (although he doesn't say it quite like that, that's why it speeds you up).  See the illustrative freeze-frame at 0:39.  He's extending on the 'downhill' side to propel himself forwards!

He also talks about maintaining pressure on the 'uphill' side of the ramps, but only enough to stick the landing based on the slope/distance of the jump.  If he didn't need to jump that high he wouldn't need that pressure at all and could go even faster!  When they're talking about flatter sections, he explicitly mentions absorbing on the 'uphill' side to maintain speed and avoid getting kicked too far up in the air (see: freeze frame at 1:15, he talks about letting the bike "flow" and you can see the rider's speed isn't affected as much by the ramp when he flexes on the uphill).  You can also see that demonstrated at the section starting at about 0:45 on the smaller (sized more like ski moguls) bumps where they don't need as much vertical.  The rider extends on the landing and flexes on the uphill (or at least near the lip) to constantly build speed without going very high on the jumps.

Generally you don't need to pressure like this to speed up while skiing moguls, because gravity provides plenty of acceleration.  If you want to slow down with this effect you'd have to do the opposite -- flex on the landing, extend hard on the uphill.  However, you'd also get pushed up hard vertically (like in a quarter pipe) unless you back off the pressure as you get closer to the lip.

That becomes more of a problem when you're skiing and the hill gets steeper.  As the pitch increases, 'up' (directly away from the slope) is less aligned with gravity, so it's much easier to launch yourself.  That limits how much pressure you can practically use on the 'uphill' face.  Beyond a certain point (of either pitch or speed) you may have to actively flex just not to get launched.  To slow down you can either skid (generate friction) or turn/deflect your skis in the horizontal plane to generate more force.  These let you slow down your skis without getting pushed 'up' as much.

Quote:

Perhaps the following examples can help someone to realize what is behind slowing/speeding

Say that we have a bumper that jumps between regularly spaced bumps. The impact time/distance is very short and he is completely in the air between the bumps.

He does this in three ways,

1. He jumps from the top of one bump to the top of the next. At the top the bump has the same slope as the average of the hill, say 20 degrees.

2. He jumps from the front side of one bump to front side of the next. Here the slope of the bump is -10 degrees, i.e. the slope is the opposite compared to the slope.

3. He jumps from one backside of one bump to the backside of the next. Here the slope of the bump is 60 degrees, i.e. very steep.

Now it should be quite easy to realize that in 1 the jumps do not affect the speed in any major way it is just like skiing without bumps and jumping. In 2 the bumps slows the skier down and in 3 the speed increases. To claim otherwise or to say that angular momentum would change all this is obviously wrong.

Edit, in 2 the jump could be by extending or flexing/resisting natural forces. I think this is where the source of the misunderstanding is.

Yes, that is another way to look at it.

If you stay mostly 'stacked' with the forces there is very little angular momentum in a situation like this, at least the way I would think about it.  This is more of a factor on a swing or a large halfpipe where you can build up increasingly large amounts of potential energy, but even then the skier/rider is basically acting like a point mass relative to the scale of the whole system.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthias99

I literally have no idea how you could post that video and still disagree with me, since he is saying the exact same thing I'm saying.  He talks about pressuring the bike with his legs on the downslope of the landing -- ie, the 'downhill' side.  That's where "pumping" with your legs causes you to speed up, because at that point the reaction force from the surface is pushing you forwards (although he doesn't say it quite like that, that's why it speeds you up).  See the illustrative freeze-frame at 0:39.  He's extending on the 'downhill' side to propel himself forwards!...

Let's try this slowly.

You can pump a transition, using some combo of parametric and driven oscillation, as I have noted multiple times.  The landing of those jumps, and the takeoff of those jumps, each represents a transition.  This is the same as the U shape of a halfpipe (two transitions, one on each wall, separated by flat bottom) or skatepark.

You can pump each transition.  You can pump going down a transition, just as you can going up a transition.  For instance, a skater dropping into a halfpipe, IF he wants to go faster than a "passive" drop would have him go, will drop in crouched, and then extend/drive through the transition to generate extra speed.  He then will again crouch, and extend/drive through the next transition on the next wall before he goes up to the lip of that wall.  Real simple, and the sequence is the reverse of what you are suggesting.

Extending/driving into the transition or, in the case of moguls, the face of an approaching bump, does NOT slow you down, it speeds you up.  In the real world, it is called pumping.  This is so if you hit just one transition (a speed bump on a bike, the lip of a small jump in the terrain park at a ski area, or a quarterpipe on a skateboard, or a bermed corner on a MTB) or two transitions (for instance, a halfpipe at a ski area, or a skatepark, or a steep, narrow gully at a ski area).

Here is a simplification, http://www.exploratorium.edu/skateboarding/trick04.html  "a skater first drops down into a crouch while traversing the more-or-less flat bottom of the U-shaped pipe or bowl. Then, as she enters the sloped part of the ramp or bowl, called the transition, she straightens her legs and rises up. By raising her center of mass just at the beginning of the arc, the skater gains energy and thereby increases her speed."  Note the skater increases speed, rather than slows down.  Also note that I said this was a simplification, which it is.

You, by claiming that it slows you down, have in fact inverted what happens.  And also misunderstood the video I linked.  Your claims that "Coming in prewound and extending on the 'uphill' side slows you down..."  , and  " that [extending on the uphill side of a mogul] WILL decelerate you ..." ,  " are directly counter to what actually happens.   When a skier, bike rider, or skateboarder DOES, in the real world, come in "prewound" and then extends on the "uphill" side of a transition, they end up going faster.

This is why the timing of the extension utilized by bump skiers is so important.  Full extension needs to happen before the trough, so that the legs can then be released into absorption on the face of  the next mogul.  This is because bump skiers AREN"T generally pumping for speed, they are absorbing.  However, if you do pump for speed in flat bumps at a ski area, you will use pretty much the movement pattern that Matt99 has just claimed slows you down.

Get to a skatepark, Thomas, as another poster on here already said  Or a pump track.  Or a bike park.  Or, ski some bumps.

Edited by CTKook - 9/9/13 at 1:13pm
At least you FINALLY provided something resembling an explanation of what the hell you're talking about.

The effect you're talking about there (raising/lowering your COM) is FAR more pronounced on something like a swing set or a large half pipe than in something like moguls or small rollers. You can do that repeatedly in a half pipe to build height (which becomes speed), and that's the only way to build speed on a swingset, but that's not what the bike riders in that video are doing. Watch the flat section again - he's keeping his COM at a relatively steady height and pushing the bike against the downslopes and flexing on the upslopes to gain speed. You seem to be denying that this effect exists.

The reaction force from the 'uphill' part of a ramp or the face of a quarter/half pipe DOES slow you down. It also redirects you upwards, but in doing so you lose velocity, AKA slowing down. Increasing pressure on the surface enhances this effect. In a half pipe there is a strong curvature. So if you focus that pressure on the early part of the transition you get more of an upwards component, which slows you down less and drives you higher. If you apply pressure later you get more of a horizontal component that slows you down without gaining height. In a situation where you repeatedly go through large vertical movements of your COM, yes, you can drive your COM vertically at certain points to put more energy into the system. That's not the dominant effect when the overall vertical displacements are relatively small.

If you want to gain linear speed down a bumpy track, then you do what the rider in that video described - pressure on the downhills, flex/absorb the uphills. The opposite will bleed off linear speed. Depending on the shape of the bumps and exactly where you pressure it will also turn some of that into potential energy as you catch air. Up to a certain point depending on the height of the bumps you can add vertical displacement, but unless you're on a large halfpipe or swing (or you have VERY large bumps) you won't be able to keep adding more and more vertical movement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthias99

... that's not what the bike riders in that video are doing. ...

Again, classic.

Yes, it is what they are doing.  He even talks about absorption just past the 1 minute mark:  "When you want to squash a jump...maybe you are going to go too far...you kind of soak the lip up with your arms..."  I.e., soak the lip up as...yes...speed control.

There is also a way of doing the same, on a bike or even on a dirtbike, using only the rear wheel, which is even more directly the same as bump skier absorption, and for the same reason.

As far as pumping a transition, the basics of dirt jumping are exactly that:  come in with the bike "loaded," i.e. having downweighted the bike, then EXTEND TALL as you load the lip, then in the air bring your feet up and get low on the bike, as you can see these riders doing.  If you come in perfectly, you pump the landing, if you come in short, you stay low and sneak in, if you go a bit far, you extend your legs and soak up the landing but lose speed and often have to bail on the next jump.  It is basic stuff.  You can also drive with your hips and such -- Jack97 and me have both repeatedly mentioned rotary for a reason in this thread -- but if you can't even get the basics, there is no need to get to nuances.

Again, it is easy to get some hand's-on learning at a skatepark or pumptrack.  You can even find a speed bump at a local condo complex and simply work on making speed off of that one bump which, yes, is a piece of transition among other things.

Edited by CTKook - 9/9/13 at 2:41pm
Quote:
Again, classic.

Yes, it is what they are doing.

No, it's not, but if you're going to misinterpret your own sources then clearly you're not going to listen to me.  Have fun with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthias99

No, it's not, but if you're going to misinterpret your own sources then clearly you're not going to listen to me.  Have fun with that.

What is amazing is that things like bump skiing and dirt jumping are such common activities -- and it ain't no secret how they're done.  Attempts on here to deny those plain mechanics should be a warning to people as to the nature of the content here, among other things.

I should be clear that, in the real world, there are in fact lots of ski instructors who do, say, dirt jump or ride pump tracks or ride lift-served MTB, as well as know how to ski bumps, and who do these with good technique at a high level.  And they do it just like everyone else, e.g. pumping off of jumps for speed, and absorbing in the bumps.

Here's a vid of the bumper extending to get air, what we have been calling pumping. Getting that pop was just important then as it in now.

Another pumping vid , through a long track, it was not intended for that but they made it work, i can clearly see the extension on the face (uphill side) of the track and the drive down afterwards. Aligns with what CTK has been saying.

So, how about pumping/repeatedly downweighting in really soft, deep, soggy spring snow?  Might that reduce speed and momentum?

Holy crap...this is still being discussed??!!?? I think we all need some snow to ski on . FWIW, I was just ribbin' CT a bit with my comment--that was a rather nasty thread. CT, apologies for messin' with ya.

zenny

Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune

Holy crap...this is still being discussed??!!??

zenny

According to the 'Big Book of Internet Trolling' one of the major goals is to see just how long you can make a thread before everyone realizes you are a troll and stops responding.

fom

Quote:
Originally Posted by jack97

Here's a vid of the bumper extending to get air, what we have been calling pumping. Getting that pop was just important then as it in now.

Another pumping vid , through a long track, it was not intended for that but they made it work, i can clearly see the extension on the face (uphill side) of the track and the drive down afterwards. Aligns with what CTK has been saying.

That Jaguar lawn-sculpture is just beautiful!  Here's one that shows "manualling" through a section on only the rear wheel, which as I mentioned earlier is even more analogous to skiing,

I think it must be very confusing for passive readers to see such conflicting accounts of how skaters, skiers in bumps or a skiercross course  or a gully, bike riders, etc. might pump for speed or pop off a bump for a jump, or absorb to suck up speed.  Let me assure them that this is not controversial in the real world -- pumptracks, for instance, are now a fairly widespread piece of public rec infrastructure, as are skateparks and for that matter mogul runs at ski areas.  I have literally never, ever heard a skater suggest that pumping a transition slows you down -- I mean, it is a very strange thing to say.  In terms of using absorption, there is a reason why bump camps build things like absorption tanks, and it is not to help bump skiers speed up by absorbing.

It is unfortunate to see real technique inverted, as has happened in this thread.  One of the weird things on here is how some regular posters seem drawn to positions that are in fact completely in conflict with the real world, be it claiming that extending on the face of a bump will slow a skier down, or claiming that airbag packs AREN"T effective.  It can be very perplexing to deal with these types of reality inversions.

One other way that the discussion of skateparks, bike parks, etc. is relevant to the topic of self-assessment, though, is in fact transition and related park skills and similar.  Can you not just suck up speed in bumps, but also pump for speed?  Can you drop into a ski resort pipe and get air in the pipe?  Can you air out of a gully?  Can you do small to medium rock drops?  These are also all very attainable skills for 20-30 day/year skiers with a decent level of fitness( IF they do other related activities year-round) or instructors, and probably should be part of a full cert for that matter.

Based on what you feel, it's difficult to compare resisting on the uphill side of a bump while biking vs skiing, because the friction is so much smaller on a bike compared to skis on snow.

But if you resist absorbing on the uphill face of a bump, you increase the force on the snow,ie perceived weight.
The braking force of skis on snow is direct, ly proportional to the perceived weight of the skier, so when you resist absorption, the braking force increases, and you slow down.

Sorry to say, but I think you misinterpret the video. Just to balance here are few links of people who seem to actually understand how to pump. These are the three first hits I found with google. I'm glad that not the entire wheel-community has misunderstood how to pump.

"

1. When you approach the jump your arms and legs compress in
2. As you hit the top of the jump push your arms and legs down and forward through the transiation"

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/f61/bmx-racing-tips-71173/

"In simple terms speed jumping is just bunnyhopping the whole jump altogether.
But it is a little more subtle than that, as you really are just bunnyhoping over the lip so that you are not launched. As your front tire starts to hit the beggining of the transition up, lift up hard on the bars and throw the bike up and forward, with a big pedal stroke, kind of like a trials pedal kick but at full speed, don't stop pedaling, ever.
if the bike seems to be going high, simply drive the bike down towards the earth.
Ideally this should happen after the top of the table, on the down tranny, it will feel kind of like dropping into a bowl in the skate park."

http://www.leelikesbikes.com/pushing-through-a-bmx-double.html

"

"

I think this last picture may reveal some of the misunderstanding in this thread. In 2 the rider pushes down, and this is to get some up momentum before the incline. When he actually hits the incline, in 3, he pulls up. The same was taught in SG and DH, it was called a pre-jump. We don't teach that anymore because it was too accident prone. If you mistime it you will make a gigantic jump instead of optimizing speed.

I think that perhaps CT and Jack are talking about the push in 2, while the rest of us have been talking about the pull in 3. Two different things but they are very close in time.

Nolo wins troll of the year.

having seen some of the posters in this thread ski some in person, and just by judging Ct post on everything , my money would say CT would own most of you at what you think is your game. one of the poster in particular has alot to learn about terrain management aka pressure control( I dare not call its absorption or pumping) that CTkook is talking about. with that said there is this really funny parody variety act from norway that deserves alot more attention and is alot more fun than this thread. video NSFW. will probably make you blush alittle bit .

[Moderator: Video deleted NSFW]

Another attempt at explaining what is going on, without involving angular momentum or whatever that is not necessary.

Look at this terrain feature. The skier/biker/whatever is coming in from the left.

Is it possible to use this feature (in isolation) to speed up? No because there are no forces that can push you to the right. You cannot do any magic tricks with parametric oscillation or conserving angular momentum.

Is it possible to use this feature to slow down? Yes, by having pressure at 2, e.g. by coming in low and extending at 2, or by extending/jumping at 1 and stick the landing by absorption at 2, or just do come in stacked and resist the forces, other combos. You can completely stop e.g. by jumping at 1 and land at 2 with 90 degree angle to the surface

Is it possible to avoid slowing down? Yes, by having no pressure at 2, e.g. by jumping at 1 and landing at 3, or by sucking the legs up at 1 and keep them sucked up during 2, or a combo.

If you come in from the right you can increase the speed by similar logic.

Don't go bringing logic and physics into this, Jamt...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthias99

Don't go bringing logic and physics into this, Jamt...

I just did it to go over 500 posts in the thread. If we just find a way to bring pmts or svmm into the discussion I think we can go for a new record!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt

I just did it to go over 500 posts in the thread. If we just find a way to bring pmts or svmm into the discussion I think we can go for a new record!

They don't believe moving the com increase/decreases speed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamt

Another attempt at explaining what is going on, without involving angular momentum or whatever that is not necessary.

Look at this terrain feature. The skier/biker/whatever is coming in from the left.

Is it possible to use this feature (in isolation) to speed up? No because there are no forces that can push you to the right. You cannot do any magic tricks with parametric oscillation or conserving angular momentum.

Is it possible to use this feature to slow down? Yes, by having pressure at 2, e.g. by coming in low and extending at 2, or by extending/jumping at 1 and stick the landing by absorption at 2, or just do come in stacked and resist the forces, other combos. You can completely stop e.g. by jumping at 1 and land at 2 with 90 degree angle to the surface

Is it possible to avoid slowing down? Yes, by having no pressure at 2, e.g. by jumping at 1 and landing at 3, or by sucking the legs up at 1 and keep them sucked up during 2, or a combo.

If you come in from the right you can increase the speed by similar logic.

Only thing is, in the real world, it is possible to pump this type of feature.

Sorry to keep bringing this back to reality.

Again from the Big Book of Internet Trolling.  "Always disagree with what the others post, don't try to refute what they say in any real way just say that they are wrong and obviously don't understand anything. Keep repeating this action no matter what they say.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman

Again from the Big Book of Internet Trolling.  "Always disagree with what the others post, don't try to refute what they say in any real way just say that they are wrong and obviously don't understand anything. Keep repeating this action no matter what they say.

The social investment that some of the posters on here have in a counterfactual discussion of these issues is quite striking.  Again, it is one reason why passive readers need to be careful before trying to get any info from any thread on here -- the forum breeds, within some posters, a pretty jarring disconnect with the real world, on everything from basic safety gear to technique.

In the current case, there's already been ample explanation and even ample video posted.  It is enough to simply note that Jamt, having gotten so many other things wrong, now has posted a feature that he says can't be pumped, that in the real world should be recognizable to people with backgrounds in these activities as something that can get pumped and is present in many skateparks and bike parks among other things.

TBBoIT;

Repeat, repeat, repeat. No matter how many times you have said the same thing say it again. If you can make your repeat appear to be a response to the others post you are moving into the upper levels of Internet Trolling

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook

Only thing is, in the real world, it is possible to pump this type of feature.

Sorry to keep bringing this back to reality.

With pump you mean increase speed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman

TBBoIT;

Repeat, repeat, repeat. No matter how many times you have said the same thing say it again. If you can make your repeat appear to be a response to the others post you are moving into the upper levels of Internet Trolling

This type of personal attack is also more par for the course from the often incredibly insular posters on here.  Yelling troll is a way to try to blow smoke over the real points.

Let's be even more real-world:  flat banks are some of the easiest things to start beginners on, in learning how to pump, because for many beginners they are visually less intimidating than a more-circular transition that ends in something that, to them, looks steep and frightening.  (Mechanically, it's easier to pump a curved or roundish transition, but there's a difference between easier and visually less scary.)  So, http://homepage.ntlworld.com/paul.ballard/paul/sk8boardworld/how-to-sk8/Regular/pumping.htm  ,

"...

Method

• Skate towards a small flat-bank
• Crouch down
• Stand-up quickly as your front wheels touch the bottom of the ramp and lean backwards."  [the leaning backwards bit I'd have expressed a bit differently, but whatever.]

Again, as so often happens, you for whatever reason have people putting forward inversions of reality -- pump the face of a transition to slow down -- and also claiming that basic things are impossible when, in the real world, they may not only be possible but beginner-friendly.

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 › A simple self-assessment test