or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New things, old words. - Page 3  

post #61 of 83
New nuts, old squirrels? Old swine, new pearls?
post #62 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune View Post

Rick, how about "counteracting" the tendency of the upper to follow/turn with, the lower.
zenny

 

Yeah, I see what you mean.  Hey wait, following that train of thought, we could really simplify ski terminology, because "counteracting"  could replace most every instructional term in the sport.  

 

Angulation and counter balance could be changed to "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to lean into a turn.

 

Fore balance could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to be in the back seat.  

 

Tipping could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts the skier's natural tendency to ride a low edge angle.  

 

Carving could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to twist the feet.

 

Athletic Stance could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to crouch.  

 

Arc to Arc could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to pivot.

 

Anticipation could be called "counteracting" because it counteracts a skier's natural tendency to rotate.

 

Completing your turn could be called "counteracting" because ti counteracts a skier's tendency to follow the falline.   

 

 

 

It could go on and on.  Poor Bob Barnes, though.  He's going to have to print a new edition of his book, to shorten his glossary.  ;) 

post #63 of 83
Ummm, ok rolleyes.gif

zenny
post #64 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

I actually think COUNTER-ACTION is one of the worst new brandings out there, because even the name itself is misleading.  In the creating of a countered state, nothing is being counteracted.  Look at the definition:  


counteract



 





[koun-ter-akt
] Spell Syllables





  • [URL=]Synonyms[/URL]


  • [URL=]Word Origin[/URL]






verb (used with object)



1.

to act
 in opposition to; frustrate by contrary action.

 


:  to make ineffective or restrain or neutralize the usually ill effects of by means of an opposite force, action, or influence counteract fatigue>


 

 






We are not trying to restrain or render ineffective something else when we move into a state of counter.  We're just trying to orientate our torso in a direction "counter" to the direction the skis are pointing and turning, without that movement affecting how our skis are interacting with the snow.  The term "counter action" by nature of it's definition would have you think otherwise.  That new name tag does even more harm than the others in creating confusion.  

Hey Rick, welcome back. Gotta call you out on this one. The coiner of that term named it so because he teaches its use to counteract, cancel, and nullify a rotational torque induced by his flavor of edging movement. As you know, he does not like twisting torques applied to skis. Counteracting seems aptly named given this background. Whether you approve of the technical teachings is a different matter ....

Edit: iphone spell correction error
post #65 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

 

To "counter" some of your other points...  you have been quite outspoken that you think true carving can only be considered as arc to arc skiing, so why is any new language such as "arc to arc" necessary?  By your definition, seems like simply saying "carving" is enough.  I do happen to think carving does not have to be arc to arc, so I actually do like having this language to distinguish it, but just pointing out the inconsistency.

 

 

 

Careful there, BTS, you might mistakenly get close to agreeing with me.  

 

You misunderstood what I said.  I never proposed that all true carving is Arc to Arc.  Far from it.  Carving simply refers to how the skis are interacting with the snow, at any particular moment in time.  Specifically, no intentional twisting of the feet and smearing of the track.  The ski leaves a clean line, tail following tip.  How much of the turn is carved in that matter is not the issue.  The entire turn does NOT have to be carved for carving to have been done.  As I explained, in the days before shape skis Arc to arc was pretty rare.  In racing, where the vast majority of carving was seen, most turns either started with a pivot, or ended with a step.  That is not arc to arc carving.  Back in the day, one of the few places arc to arc caving could be found on a race trail was in DH and SG events.  There was no term for it, because it was common enough to warrant its own term.

 

Once the shape ski appeared, Arc to Arc skiing became a more user friendly thing to do, so the name came to be.  

post #66 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpedges View Post


Hey Rick, welcome back. Gotta call you out on this one. The coiner of that term named it so because he teaches its use to counteract, cancel, and nullify a rotational torque induced by his flavor of edging movement. As you know, he does not like twisting torques applied to skis. Counteracting seems aptly named given this background. Whether you approve of the technical teachings is a different matter ....

Edit: iphone spell correction error

 

Hi Sharpedges, thanks for the welcome back.  

 

I do remember that years back he promoted the idea of early counter, creating it during the transition, and spoke of a force that would twist the skis down the slope early in the turn if not combated.  .  That was back in John Mason days.  Seems more recently he's doing some talking about delaying the counter creation a bit, till after initiation.  is he rethinking his thinking on it?  

 

Also notice he's now picking up on the idea of pressuring the little toe edge of the old inside ski early in the transition, before the ski starts to roll off edge, like Ligety is talking about in his recent video.  Does he know that's ILE?  

post #67 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

Also notice he's now picking up on the idea of pressuring the little toe edge of the old inside ski early in the transition, before the ski starts to roll off edge, like Ligety is talking about in his recent video.  Does he know that's ILE?  

The concept of a balance transfer to the LTE is not new. It is discussed in HH's first book, published in 1997. It is *NOT* the same thing as ILE.
post #68 of 83

how did this thread devolve into a PMTS demonizing and mis-information thread?  :hijack:

 

DD is right, Harb has never taught anything remotely related to Rick's ILE concept.  And I can predict he never will.  

 

@Rick, I see what you mean about arc-to-arc, you were referring solely to lack of pivot entry, and ok, makes sense to me.  Though it seems you could have carve-to-carve no?  Why introduce the word arc if "carving" has already been around for 40 years to say the same thing according to you?

post #69 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223 View Post


The concept of a balance transfer to the LTE is not new. It is discussed in HH's first book, published in 1997. It is *NOT* the same thing as ILE.

 

I have not read his book.  Heard you can get them in used book stores in Colorado for a couple bucks, will pick one up if I see one.   You're right, though, if it promotes transfer of balance to the little toe edge of old inside ski, it is nothing like ILE, nor what Ted was explaining he's doing now, which IS ILE.   ILE is a transition.  Transferring balance to the old inside ski little toe edge is not a transition, it will not prompt a transition.  

post #70 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

Transferring balance to the old inside ski little toe edge is not a transition, it will not prompt a transition. 

 

Sure it will.  

 

I suggest you consider reading harb's materials in order to understand it better.  Take it or leave it, different strokes for different folks, but it doesn't sound to me like you have a very good understanding of his materials to begin with, which would explain some of your misunderstandings about the terminology he commonly uses.

post #71 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

 

 

DD is right, Harb has never taught anything remotely related to Rick's ILE concept.  And I can predict he never will.  

 

 

 

That's a shame he would never consider teaching it.  It's a useful transition,  it's Ted Ligety's transition of choice now in his GS racing.

 

 

 

Quote:
@Rick, I see what you mean about arc-to-arc, you were referring solely to lack of pivot entry, and ok, makes sense to me.  Though it seems you could have carve-to-carve no?  Why introduce the word arc if "carving" has already been around for 40 years to say the same thing according to you?

I can't speak for the creator of the term, BTS, why he chose the name he did, I'm not him.  Like I said before, the word or phrase chosen is not that important, it's just a name tag.  It could be named "Pink Elephant Turns", it wouldn't matter.  It's the recognition and explaining of a new concept that is important, that represents original thought and innovation, not the name tag you give it.   

post #72 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

I can't speak for the creator of the term, BTS, why he chose the name he did, I'm not him.  Like I said before, the word or phrase chosen is not that important, it's just a name tag.  It could be named "Pink Elephant Turns", it wouldn't matter.  It's the recognition and explaining of a new concept that is important, that represents original thought and innovation, not the name tag you give it.   

 

If its ok to say Pink Elephant Turns, then shouldn't it be ok to say counter-balance and counter-action?

post #73 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

 

Sure it will.  

 

 

 

 

No, BTS, transferring balance to the old inside ski little toe edge WILL NOT prompt a transition.  You will just continue the current turn on your inside ski.  ILE (Inside Leg Extension) transitions and OLR (Outside Leg Relaxation) transitions are actually more similar then you imagine, and both prompt a transition by creating imbalance, not balance.  

post #74 of 83

:bs:

post #75 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

 

If its ok to say Pink Elephant Turns, then shouldn't it be ok to say counter-balance and counter-action?

I've said all along, naming something new what you want is fine with me.  Relabeling something that already has a name is what I have issue with.  Come up with a new concept, BTS, give it any name you want, you have my full support, as long as it truly is a new and accurate concept.  Just don't try to prosper on others innovations by giving them a new name.  Do that and you'll get no respect from me.  

post #76 of 83

Why do we need to come up with anything new?  Witherall and others figured out how skiing works a long time ago, there really aren't any new concepts to come up with.  New ways of talking about it, sure why not?  Anyway, this is beating a dead horse.  Go right on demonizing and criticizing, the man you are criticizing is very guilty of doing the same to everyone else so what goes around comes around as far as I'm concerned.

post #77 of 83

BTS, the BS meter you put up, does it refer to the "transfer balance does not prompt transition" thing?  If so we should discuss that more here, because if you don't believe it there will undoubtedly others here who didn't realize it as well, and it's an important concept to come to understand.  

post #78 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post

 

I suggest you consider reading harb's materials in order to understand it better.  Take it or leave it, different strokes for different folks, but it doesn't sound to me like you have a very good understanding of his materials to begin with, which would explain some of your misunderstandings about the terminology he commonly uses.

 

Rick, I'd second this suggestion. It seems as though your return to this site is accompanied by a very focused agenda to discredit and criticize all PMTS terms and ideas. That's your prerogative, as you obviously are a direct competitor to PMTS with your own coaching. However, you may consider taking the time to understand what PMTS teaches before trying to deconstruct it. Until you do, many of your criticisms are nothing but straw man arguments. 

post #79 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by doublediamond223 View Post


The concept of a balance transfer to the LTE is not new. It is discussed in HH's first book, published in 1997. It is *NOT* the same thing as ILE.

 

Agreed. And it is, in fact, precisely what Ligety is talking about in his recent (although it's not so recent now) video discussion of his GS technique. He speaks of "clawing his way" onto the LTE of the old inside ski, not extending off that ski.

 

This whole conversation is so 2005-2008, some of the very best technical discussions on Epic. I am pleased to see it back and hope it wont be curbed however much anyone's feathers get ruffled.

post #80 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

Why do we need to come up with anything new?  Witherall and others figured out how skiing works a long time ago, there really aren't any new concepts to come up with.  New ways of talking about it, sure why not?  Anyway, this is beating a dead horse.  Go right on demonizing and criticizing, the man you are criticizing is very guilty of doing the same to everyone else so what goes around comes around as far as I'm concerned.

I agree with a portion of that.  There's not much new under the sun when it comes to the skills of skiing.  But I won't venture so far as to say nothing is or ever will be new again.  I think innovation at this point in the history of the sport will come in the form of new focus on elements of skills and technique that have always been there, but have been flying under the radar so to speak.  Or small tweeks to technique that extracts a tad higher performance.  just saw that happen at the Men's WC slalom at Levi.  Or new drills that enhance the ability to teach a skill to a student.  Or equipment innovations, that change not the skills of the sport, but how we blend them to achieve optimal performance out of that equipment.  That happened when the shape ski was introduced, and believe it will not be the last time something like that impacts the sport.

post #81 of 83

but no new words!!!  apparently....

post #82 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

but no new words!!!  apparently....

 

 

Sure there will be.  There will alway be folks around to tag new names on old concepts.  And i'll always be around too, to give them hell.  :jedi: 

post #83 of 83
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardDaysNight View Post
 

 

Agreed. And it is, in fact, precisely what Ligety is talking about in his recent (although it's not so recent now) video discussion of his GS technique. He speaks of "clawing his way" onto the LTE of the old inside ski, not extending off that ski.

 

This whole conversation is so 2005-2008, some of the very best technical discussions on Epic. I am pleased to see it back and hope it wont be curbed however much anyone's feathers get ruffled.

 

 

Hi HardDaysNight.  Soon as I can I'll start a discussion on the switching balance thing, why it does not prompt a transition, and why it clearly is not what Ligety is doing. 

 

You might have seen a different video, in the one I saw he didn't say the words "clawing his way".  If so, would you post it up here, I'd like to see it.  In the one I saw he talked about stepping onto the uphill edge of the uphill ski, before it switches edges, then "pushing on the ski".

 

  

 

Here's the video, I'm sure some would like to see what we're talking about.  He talks about using ILE (though he doesn't use the term ILE) mid way through the video, and you can see him doing it so clearly in the first series of turns at the start of the video.  Watch how it looks like he's walking through the course, taking steps from ski to ski, with old inside leg extension happening before the skis roll off edge.  Textbook ILE.

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
This thread is locked