Originally Posted by justanotherskipro
Sorry Josh you're dead wrong! I can move my CoM without doing any leg movements. Curling the spine, throwing an arm out to the side, raising both arms above my head, putting them behind my back, or in front of my chest, and twisting a shoulder aft and down, being only a few of the moves that will move that imaginary CoM (it doesn't really exist beyond being an imaginary math construct).
Well actually JASP, all of those movements require activation below the waist at the very least to apply pressure against a platform or to make a counter movement. Bend your spine one way, your feet either have to go the other way or they have to leverage against something and manage pressure. There are certainly cases where angulating a bit more at the end of a turn has its place, but this should not be confused with the complete transition. The edge change, that's what we are talking about aren't we? No way you are going to move your CoM across without using your legs.
Think back to the days of the Arlberg wind up, or the tip the torso to the outside and touch your outside boot cuff, or planting a blocking pole plant that spins you around, or even jack-knife at the hips move we saw from Killy, or Stenmark, or a thousand other skiers over the years.
Manipulating the external forces are definitely present in many aspects of skiing I don't think anyone here would disagree with that JASP. Chad has made pretty much zero mention of those factors or how we interact with them. The minute he starts explaining movements in clearer terms relating to specifically how various body movements create desirable outcomes in that environment, I think he will gain more support. The same goes for you.
Even Kate mentioned the metronome like movements where the feet are the anchor and the body moves across the skis like the arm of that metronome.
That description does not explain how it works and totally ignores the work that is being done by the lower half to make it work. You said it yourself, the feet provide the anchor point.
All of those move have been in vogue at some point in the last sixty years but without recognizing them and why they worked, it's hard to talk about why we have morphed ski teaching towards that strong lower half focus.
I think lower half focus has been around quite a while and for good reasons. Don't fight it. We don't encourage upper rotary do we? No we teach to do it from the legs. The same goes for tipping. Yes shaped skis make tipping more relevant then ever.
Nor does it mean we are not teaching some form of upper body movement along with upper half stability. It's this glossing over that point that I so strongly object to reading, or hearing from trainers and such. IMO PSIA has done all of us a disservice to dumb down the whole subject of whole body participation. Katy, Meagan and Bob speak briefly about the whole body actively participating in our balancing efforts prior to talking about tipping movements originating in the feet. Even Bud's fabulous post about finding a centered stance prior to shifting our focus down to the bottom of our feet and into the lower legs mentions that over arching principle Chad has been trying to articulate.
Great points here! We have specifically mentioned counter action and counter balance numerous times on this thread and in the past. None of the footwork people you seem to disagree with would rally against those movements. But as I said before its important to recognize for what they are, they are counter movements. They actually refrain the CoM from rotating or moving across, while the lower half does the work of moving across. both halves active but totally different, coordinated roles. This seems different then what you and chad have been trying to claim.
Sadly guys like BTS throw in a comment about Chad's limited exposure to the ski teaching world and the sport itself, thereby inferring his wealth of knowledge in the greater world of physical therapy and recover is somehow irrelevant.
As long as he continues to rally against good ski movements then yea all the data about physio stuff is meaningless. Swimming up stream, running up hill, pissing into the wind, going against the grain..... I am very much hoping he can check himself, learn a bit more about skiing, stop trying to prove people wrong that do know a lot about skiing, then bring the wealth of physio knowledge. As it stands his info is not congruent with good skiing.
I agree with you though that PSIA has also sorely short changed us all in the details on how the entire body works together in coordination of various body parts having different roles doing different things for a common overall goal.
I have asked chad several times to try to explain our ski movements more specifically and to relate movements to the physics going on and he always gets upset or avoids the question. Unfortunately all his knowledge is useless without that context and he has taken an antagonistic approach to trying to relate what he does know about the human body to an activity he doesn't appear to know very well, skiing.
The good news is that this forum can provide him an opportunity to learn if he opens his heart and mind for it.