Originally Posted by "Tog"
Forget pivot slips, yes the skis are at critical edge angle, aka "flat". (They are not flat to the slope) Does not make the excercise useless.
So how could you tell visually whether someone is using "self steering" of the skis or steering the skis themselves?
If someone is developing a lot of counter then self steering can still be at work, a lot of skiers are using it even if they think not. But the skis have to be tipped. The video above of fail pivot slips are using huge amounts of it.
It's also possible to self steer without developing any counter, it's an interesting discovery session to isolate self steering effects of skis and explore what they can do while avoiding any and all foot twisting. But in real world skiing, some counter can be introduced, allowing upper/lower separation. But it does not require such active foot twisting that pivot slips encourage. Also my opinion is that when skiing on outside dominant skis, that ILS loses some of inside leg as a stability point. In my view real world counter in a ski turn happens mostly around the outside hip joint and the outside ski is used as anchor point to counter-rotate the pelvis out into counter as the skis self steer inwards.
Real counter is a very small amount. Look at BB's animation and the grey pelvis only tips up and down a small amount while the legs are turning a ton. The leg independence is not really the counter though I know everyone has come to think of it that way. Rather counter action happens using muscles up and down the side of your body to basically manipulate that small grey bar in BB's animation, the feet can turn underneath that, pushing and pulling against that counteraction, and using the outside ski as anchor point.
When you see classic pivot slips, there is no self steering really. The skis are pretty much flat and its pretty much all about twisting those femurs with virtually no anchor point. A pure pivot if you will, as opposed to a smeared turn like the video above where edge engagement and ski steering are resulting in nearly pivot slips but not quite. Because they are edged they require self steering to do its magic and that requires a bit of forward motion that a pivot slip doesn't have. That's why you see them moving from side to side making actual turn shapes, albeit very tight.
While looking for self steering, look for edge engagement, steeriness, some forward motion, and actually probably not huge steering angles because large steering angles and edge angle tend to have opposite effect, self straightening. Counter and femur rotation optional, but if you see super isolated ILS femurs then maybe they are twisting more, but I doubt you will see that with edge engagement.
Originally Posted by "Jamt"
JASP, I too find it very interesting to explore similiarities. To apply sideways pressure along the edge at a fore position is possible in at least two ways, either you are fore and/ or you twist the femurs in the socket to produce this sideways force.
The fore is the manipulation I mentioned before but lets look at the other option, to twist the femurs in the socket.
This will create some sideways pressure and will engage the shovels, but it cannot be done with arbitrary force persistenly throughout the turn because every action has a reaction, and in this case this action will cause the upper body to act in the other direction. In one system this is called counter acting, and I cannot see why it should be so different from ILS to cause the huge amount of debate that has been going on. There are differences in timing etc but on an overall scale a good skier from one system will not be that different from a good skier in another system.
Semantics to a large degree I suppose, but personally I like to talk about pivoting, ILS etc in transition, unweighted. When the edges are engaged I think it is better to talk about counter, fore-aft and edge angles.
JASP and jamt great points. I actually do endorse a very small amount of femur rotary maybe that will shock some of you. But not for pivoting the skis. For one thing you want to twist your feet to keep up with the self steering so that the ski doesn't have to push your whole passive leg. So at a simplistic level turn the leg just at the right amount so that you don't feel those torques acting on the leg. Further to that you can apply even a tad more as JASP suggested to kind of help self steering do its job, but again without actually pivoting the ski, just very light pressure, not enough to cause counter either or move something away and not be sustainable. Its more like just enough to sense you are not blocking self steering. Like following someone in a dark room and touching their shoulder to keep up without actually pushing them.
Also if you create too much lateral pressure in the side of the front, I feel you can twist the tail out of engagement into wash out.
It's generally more effective to manipulate fore-aft pressures to manipulate self steering effects a bit and/or tip more.
Originally Posted by "Jamt"
There would be more counter in the latter case. But I am of the opinion that a skilled skier uses more self steering, but he may not know it! It is quite sub-conscious in a good experienced skier. It just happens.
Edited by borntoski683 - 11/14/13 at 4:56pm
Exactly, a lot of people are getting more of it then they realize.
I'd like to pose another question, why the obsession over pivoting the ski around the foot point? Aside from dreadful thoughts about heel pushing, if the pivot point is the tip or the tail or in between what is so bad after all?
I'm just posing the question to hear some well thought out reasons for why a pivot under the foot would be superior to a pivot under the shovel, for example. Certainly if you are trying to do it by twisting your feet then a tail wash out would probably be bad. But if it comes from self steering on engaged edges, then I suggest it may not be under the foot and may not be a problem. So why is pivoting under the foot such a goal?