Originally Posted by LiquidFeet
Yes, I know it's ILE. It feels quite distinct from OLR. The momentary LTE pressure is absent in OLR.
Try to search deeper for the distinguishing differences between those two ideas. Perhaps there really are not two distinct approaches here. The underlined words above are not accurate.
First, toppling begins the minute you change which leg has tension and which leg is relaxed. No extension or flexion is necessary for that to happen. In that regard, they are both exactly the same. Even in a good quality OLR, the pressure goes immediately to the LTE of the uphill ski.
Secondly, if after relaxing the downhill leg, you don't allow it to collapse while continuing to keep it relaxed, then you will soon find it blocking your CoM again from moving across. That is also the case with both ILE and OLR schools of thought. Nothing different. In all cases, the downhill leg needs to get out of the way of the CoM by collapsing and staying relaxed, otherwise, the CoM stops moving across (unless of course the ILE keeps on pushing hehe)
So what then is the difference between the so called ILE and OLR? ILE is purported to have an "extension". Why is extension needed? To move the CoM. To push it. Pure and simple. You can push it a little or push it a lot. But you're still pushing it.
Some on the internet, including myself in the past, have talked about Inside Leg Extension (ILE) as a form of transition. I have never heard anyone talk about it quite like this outside of these forums. In PSIA circles, extension to move across is often presented, but there is no mistaking they are suggesting more than just an ILE topple across, they are suggesting clearly to move the CoM across, which whether they want to admit it or not, involves a push. The ILE fans are trying to suggest that ILE is somehow more refined then a PSIA push. But in the end, its also a push.
I feel the "release" must come from the downhill leg, pure and simple. Regardless of what you do with your old inside leg, extend it early, extend it late, push with it, go up and over or a hybrid transition of some kind, etc.... in all cases, you have to relax your old outside leg, and you have to collapse it, at least to some degree, in order to allow the CoM to keep moving down the hill. If you don't then your transition will be stalled and the ONLY way to move across will be to push yourself there somehow or else you will have to pivot the skis out for steering angle instead.
However, there are many different forms of new outside leg extension management which might include longer legs through neutral. I feel that part of Ted's current success is from very early leg extension and pressure, however, he is releasing his downhill leg totally and completely with OLR. What he is doing with the inside leg is not to move the CoM across, its just about getting that pressure earlier on the new long skis to bend them. But only in concert with 100% effective OLR in terms of moving the CoM across.
I'm not a fan of the the old internet ILE internet idea by the way. I think its hogwash. Either you release or you don't. Either you push or you don't. I think if you don't release your outside leg, you will be forced to push. If you do release your outside leg, you might still be pushing also, they are not mutually exclusive. But you have to ask yourself what is going to happen if you push. There are negative consequences.
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet
And no, ILE is certainly not what we are seeing all over the mountain amongst the recreational skiers on groomers.
Its equally pervasive amongst the vast majority of ski instructors who like to see themselves as skiing dynamically, so their extension push becomes part of the dynamic nature of how they ski.