or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"PSIA style" - Page 8

post #211 of 227
I think we are pretty close in practice if not philosophy TR.

As a patrol trainer we simply defined efficacy differently. In that way the style thing went right out the window. Get there in one piece ready to go to work was more the case. It was still about what the skis did but wholesale differences exist in their list of necessary and acceptable ski maneuvers.
For example; The much more direct path a sled needs to take often means round turns are not the best option for the operator. So braking is not going to be through turn shape. Swinging a sled sideways using round turns with a victim sitting upright in that sled and they will tip back and forth. Not exactly a good outcome. So speed control and braking must include more skid and sideslip and checking after crossing the fall line.

It is through my experience developing and instituting preferred methods and codify them in what eventually became our training manual that I see PSIA and their published manuals as prescribing a style.
post #212 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by habacomike View Post

OT, JASP, where do I find Bob's 87 page blurb?  I can't seem to locate it on the PSIA-RM website...

Mike
PM Bob
post #213 of 227
All in all I have taught what both organizations set as acceptable and preferred methods. Same goes for teaching what USSA prescribes. Remembering who you are that day and which hat you are wearing is how I see all of that.
As it should be.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 9/24/14 at 1:03pm
post #214 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

which edition year is that 4ster?  Thanks for sharing!

1970 New & Revised Edition. 

 

I believe the next was the ATM (American Teaching Method) followed by the ATS (American Teaching System) manual.  I must have those somewhere as well, they are just not within reach right now.  IIRC there was not another official PSIA "National" manual till Core Concepts & the Alpine technical manual in the early 2000's.  Although short & succinct I found the ATS manual to be the best reference for me when it came down to the nuts & bolts.

 

After skimming through this thread I have to agree that most of the public does not really relate to PSIA & "most" have no clue what a certified instructor is, let alone the different levels.

 

As far as HH goes, I have been aware of him since his time on the D-team & clearly remember some of the excellent articles he wrote for ski publications during that period in the 90's.  I remember his ideas striking a chord with me because they were progressive but certainly not revolutionary.  They fit very well with my thinking at the time & in my understanding, were not contradictory to what I had gleaned from my involvement with PSIA or USSCA.

 

As for HH or the PMTS brand recognition go, only a handful of those that I have encountered have any knowledge or experience with his system.  Those that have rarely have anything negative to say about it.

 

 

Racer style

Bump style

Patrol style

Park style (steeze)

Freeride style

Gaper style

Instructor style...

 

Sure, we see it & recognize it out on the hill everyday :eek.  IME in exams, training, teaching etc. "style" has never been a topic or something that was worked on consciously.  I believe it is a result or an interpretation & application of mechanics & technique.

 

With that said, when I look at Schiffirin whether in the race course, freeskiing or doing drills, I do not see a "style", just sound technique.  Maybe style is the result of one's flaws ...

 

:dunno

 

JF


Edited by 4ster - 9/24/14 at 7:09pm
post #215 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post
 

@borntoski683, beginning on page 43 of

 

ia the chapter titled Demonstration Forms.  I did this quickly, as I do not have much time right now but hopefully this is what you are looking for...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These pages show what I think is a progression.

---Teach people these things in this order.

---Each of these steps within the progression is called a "final form." 

 

PSIA now does not use a published progression.  
But it does have "stepping stones" which are in some ways similar to these 12 things.

The stepping stones are different, because they reflect the change in boots, bindings, and skis.

 

So, are the stepping stones NOT final forms, simply because they do not reside on a progression?

Or are they different from final forms because of some internal difference between them and the 12 listed here?

What I'm trying to get at is whether defining different ways to make turns is the no-no, or whether it's the rigid progression that is the no-no.

It's possible these questions make sense only to me.  I've been there before.

 

1.  Straight running

2.  Straight snowplow

3.  Snowplow turn

4.  Traverse

5.  Stem turn

6.  Forward sideslip

7.  Christie uphill

8.  Stem christie

9.  Parallel christie

10.  total motion - natural positions (linked turns)

11.  Short Swing

12.  Short swing on a traverse


Edited by LiquidFeet - 9/24/14 at 6:08pm
post #216 of 227
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheRusty View Post
Has Hardly

Ha.

post #217 of 227
Actually the phrase stepping stones is in the 1964 manual. It is used in the following context. "In modern teaching emphasis is no longer placed on our first classes. These first classes are stepping stones. We do not insist on prolonged basic (snow-plow, stem turn) maneuvers as in the old days.The final form are a goal for the students. The instructor, on the other hand, must be perfect in the demonstration of his finished forms.
In teaching method the objective is not uniformity. Different exercises are suggested. Equally important, the method is left to the school and instructor. In skiing we do not enjoy constant conditions. The snow changes. For example, there are days where it would be foolish to teach a side slip. Consequently the method section suggests four or five exercises for each naneuver. The object is to use corrective exercises. This helps keep the student's interest. The method section is designed to show that problems vary. Thus, there is no such thing as simply teaching the snowplow for two hours."
They go on to contrast this approach with European systems where set progressions were taught and the instructor would always follow the prescribed plan.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 9/25/14 at 7:15am
post #218 of 227
Another important idea was the explanation of what AST was. They detail seven basic principles then explain how the go about teaching them.

"The American ski technique is composed of three separate parts
1. The execution of finished technical forms
2. Teaching methods
3. Theory

The distinct separation of these components permits a definite and logical interpretation of a ski technique.
The final technical forms, based on the seven principles, and the theory can be established as a national standard. The AST does not dictate personal style. Minor differences of the instructor's style caused by body build, temperament and outside influences are recognized. As long as the skier uses the same basic principles, he is skiing the same technique."


Sounds a lot like what The Rusty was expressing about why no final forms exist in current PSIA skiing models. Although it is clearly stated later that "the school and instructor must never lose sight of the end goal: the finished technical forms".

I hope this helps explain the sometime contradictory messages from PSIA and how this has been with us from the very beginning of the organization. Which bring me back to Meagan's use of the term stepping stones, it is about methodology and building custom progressions that fit the situation, the conditions, the skill set and temperament of the student, etc.
This really sounds like a reincarnation of what those guys wrote so long ago about methodology. Absent the strong emphasis on finished forms of course.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 9/25/14 at 7:21am
post #219 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Another important idea was the explanation of what AST was. They detail seven basic principles then explain how the go about teaching them.

"The American ski technique is composed of three separate parts
1. The execution of finished technical forms
2. Teaching methods
3. Theory

The distinct separation of these components permits a definite and logical interpretation of a ski technique.
The final technical forms, based on the seven principles, and the theory can be established as a national standard. The AST does not dictate personal style. Minor differences of the instructor's style caused by body build, temperament and outside influences are recognized. As long as the skier uses the same basic principles, he is skiing the same technique."



Sounds a lot like what The Rusty was expressing about why no final forms exist in current PSIA skiing models. Although it is clearly stated later that "the school and instructor must never lose sight of the end goal: the finished technical forms".

I hope this helps explain the sometime contradictory messages from PSIA and how this has been with us from the very beginning of the organization. Which bring me back to Meagan's use of the term stepping stones, it is about methodology and building custom progressions that fit the situation, the conditions, the skill set and temperament of the student, etc.
This really sounds like a reincarnation of what those guys wrote so long ago about methodology. Absent the strong emphasis on finished forms of course.

 

Thanks; this is helpful.

I'd really like to see those seven basic principles too.  Is that possible?

post #220 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

 

Thanks; this is helpful.

I'd really like to see those seven basic principles too.  Is that possible?

1.  Natural Positioning

2.  Total Motion

3.  Unweighting

4.  Axial Motion

5.  Edge Control

6.  Weight Transfer

7.  Leverage

 

If you think about it, these seven principles are still quite viable in modern skiing. I may just replace a few terms to be movement based.  Off the top of my head it may go something like this:

 

1.  Stance, balance & alignment

2.  Flexion/extension movements

3.  Transitional movements

4.  Rotational movements

5.  Edging movements

6.  Lateral pressuring movements

7.  Longitudinal pressuring movements

post #221 of 227

That information is a thing of beauty.

It's also food for thought.

post #222 of 227
Sorry I felt the discussion was about methodology and style / final forms, or I would have included them. We need to be careful with information owned by someone else and not asking them if we can use it. Considering all the hoopla over patents lately it is wiser to paraphrase it...
post #223 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4ster View Post

 

Maybe style is the result of one's flaws ...

 

 

Of course. It absolutely is. Ever hear of a guy named Bob Dylan? Guy who can't sing who's famous for being a singer? What about Michael Chang or Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario, beautiful scrappers who had to be because they were too small to have a power game? 

post #224 of 227

No, I've been in the music business for many years and have never heard of this Bob Dylan. People who like his records must be a member of his cult.

post #225 of 227

post #226 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

Bob Dylan Mr. Jones

Excellent... just excellent. 

 

But I have found one of your countrymen that does know what's happening.... I have transcribed John Gillies' introduction to the 2011 Interski video.  

 

"So Just what is contemporary skiing? Technically, skiing has developed quiet a lot over the last number of years and because it's ruled by (basically) the limits of the human body and by the technology we have on our feet, it ends up that most of the top skiers ski pretty similarly. Quite a wide stance for stability. Lots of independence between the legs. And the skiers maintain a strong stance all the way through the arc."

post #227 of 227

It is just one of the laws of  the universe each skier will ski with their independent rate of vibration.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching