This video is great.
That is an interesting video - thx for posting. For contrast under stressful real world (cup) conditions...
I was watching the Wengen men's slalom this weekend, and noticed in many of the turns the racers would have a really pronounced pivot, resulting in skis well off the snow as they're redirected, re-engaging edges at or maybe even a little below the fall line, with a hard carve more in the bottom of the turn. I guess a lot of that has to do with the course set, and how steep the hill is, and the fact they're only concerned with getting down as fast as possible.
Tried to find some slo-mo video, but the closest I could come was some footage from Wengen about a dozen years ago - might want to mute the audio, it's pretty annoying...
Kostelic, Schoenfelder and Raich at the steepest part of the Wengen slalom slope. January 2003 or 2004 could be, I guess
Was also thinking about turns in general, and how even for freekskiers when the going gets really steep/tough it's not unusual to see hop/short swing turns, and how maybe those are in a sense a kind of check turn, where the skier launches off an edge (set) into a redirect. And how that's similar in some ways to what the World Cup slalom racers are doing with those extreme pivots, only they are not really trying to check speed and slow down, even if they are (a bit) because they absolutely have to to stay on course. ( Does that make sense? ;-)
Anyway, came across something I found interesting that touches on some of these things, so thought I'd share that as well...
Love this video. The advice is strong. What's especially good is how slowly the narrator
takes the viewer through the turns. He gives us time to see what he wants us to see.
Two odd things I want to point out, which others may have noticed. These two examples
simply indicate that people (the narrator in this case) see what they want to see. I'm not
trying to complain about the knowledge behind the descriptions which is certainly impeccable.
I only want to point out that the words used to describe what we see don't match what we see
in two cases.
At the point of this screen shot from the video, the narrator says the shoulders are level,
and draws this red line to prove it. Hmmmmmm............ His point is valid, that the shoulders
are somewhat level, but that line does not align with the shoulders or hips and neither is really
"level" to the snow surface, as viewed from this camera angle. The red line is just weird.
And at a later point the narrator says the head stays the same height off the snow. Not
true, as obvious below in these two frames from one transition. Compare the head to the
horizon. However, the point that the narrator is making, that there is no up-unweighting
going on, is perfectly valid. How often do instructors or coaches confuse their students
by using common terminology that seems to be very specific, like "shoulders level" and
"head stays the same height off the snow," when that's not actually what's happening?