or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Does This Represent Current PSIA Teaching?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does This Represent Current PSIA Teaching?

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
post #2 of 9

Yes it is.  Consider the source in that video.  PSIA  all the way.

post #3 of 9

Do you have a problem with turning the feet/legs while skiing?  

post #4 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

Do you have a problem with turning the feet/legs while skiing?  

 

Depends on if they are doing the turning or being turned.

post #5 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGolfAnalogy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

Do you have a problem with turning the feet/legs while skiing?  

 

Depends on if they are doing the turning or being turned.


Would you agree that the skier needs to ski into a counter balanced position?

 

BK

post #6 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer View Post
 


Would you agree that the skier needs to ski into a counter balanced position?

 

BK

 

Do you?

 

We may be talking semantics, but I don't believe you need to ski into counter, that whole concept seems somewhat forced. Counter should be a natural consequence of allowing your skis to turn before you do.

post #7 of 9
Bode--please define your terms. What do you mean by "counter-balance" and to a "counter balanced position"?

And to all, regarding the initial question, if you understand PSIA, you will recognize two important points. First, there is no such thing as "PSIA teaching," current or otherwise. PSIA is an instructors' organization based on building understanding of the educational and technical foundations of the sport--particularly the cause and effect relationships between the myriad of human movements and their effects on ski performance. PSIA does not dictate what movements are "correct, " as many of the classic European ski schools did in days of yore--it only helps instructors develop a better understanding of how to effect any outcome needed for any situation or student's desired purpose.

In this case, legs rotating in the hip sockets, independently of the upper body, are critical movements to develop for many reasons. It's an important technical option both when the skis turn the legs, and when the legs turn the skis--both of which occur, situationally, in good skiing (and bad, for that matter). It is a skill without which a skier would be very limited, to say the least. Certainly, it is only one of several ways a skier can get his skis to point a different direction--or to hold the skis straight and prevent them from turning as well. Its effects are different from the effects of turning the skis with other mechanical principles--and it is those cause-effect relationships that are a qualified instructor's concern. There are situations, too, when alternative "rotary mechanisms" clearly would be preferred. When you want to throw a "helicopter" (360 degree spin), for example, upper body rotation will do it, where the leg rotation of Hafer's video would not.

Second, PSIA does not teach at all. Instructors teach, and the best do their best to address the specific needs of their individual students. Instructors teach students--not institutional dogma or doctrine. PSIA helps them build their base of understanding in order to do their jobs more effectively. It does not tell them what, or how, they must teach.

And--what may not be common knowledge (even among instructors)--"PSIA" is not even a single organization. There are ten separate, independent companies that share the name and logo of "PSIA." These regional instructor associations--each with its own members and dues, cooperate, often loosely, to develop and share common "national" standards, with which each regional association then develops training and certification processes in order to evaluate and certify instructors. The so-called "national" organization ("ASEA") is but one of the ten separate companies. Its role is to facilitate the cooperation and communication among the regions. It is NOT (contrary, perhaps, to popular opinion) to dictate standards, methodology, technique, or pedagogy to the regional associations or their members.

ASEA does produce some educational materials of debatable quality and usefulness, such as the recent Alpine Technical Manual, but so do the regional associations. ASEA's manuals--regardless of what anyone thinks of their virtues or vices--are no more "The Bible" of American instruction than anything else, including materials developed within regional associations as well as resources produced by individual instructors or even non-instructors. The best instructors draw their knowledge and understanding from every source available, including their own experience.

The Mike Hafer video was put together by ASEA and, as such, represents the opinions of Mike Hafer and, perhaps, of the "National Team," whose members are employees of ASEA (and who are additiinally instructors from various regional associations, employed by various individual ski schools). Not to disparage anything in this video--I agree almost entirely with Mike in this clip--but it would be a mistake, no matter what is in it, to assume that it represents the Gospel of PSIA.

So "current PSIA instruction" really is a meaningless notion. There is no such thing. But leg rotation is an important movement in skiing--a critical skill to develop to help manage and guide (where necessary) the direction the skis point. Any instructor who fails to understand this mechanism and its effects on ski performance is missing some very important points.

Best regards,
Bob
post #8 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrGolfAnalogy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bode Klammer View Post
 


Would you agree that the skier needs to ski into a counter balanced position?

 

BK

 

Do you?

 

We may be talking semantics, but I don't believe you need to ski into counter, that whole concept seems somewhat forced. Counter should be a natural consequence of allowing your skis to turn before you do.

Why would I disagree with myself?

 

This is about semantics, but words have consequences.   I often observe that skiers (including me) are locked up at  the hips.  Their legs don't rotate at the hips, they don't have much upper and lower body separation and as a result don't balance effectively.  I had to learn turn my legs.  Mostly I don't think about that  anymore, but sometimes (like in wet heavy snow) focusing on turning my legs helps me balance more effectively. If I'm coaching a kid and he's turning his legs, how would I know if he's "letting that happen" or "making that happen"? I can only his movements, not his intentions.  If he's not rotating his legs, how do I get him to let that happen? In my experience telling anyone to "let something happen" is not usually very effective. Telling a student to let something happen is the same as telling him to continue as usual.  

 

The whole edging-only approach to ski instruction (along with the related PSIA bashing) seems misguided to me.  I understand that a lot of learners use ineffective upper body rotation, but the solution to that is to learn good rotary skills, learn to rotate the legs only, and that requires upper/lower body separation.  IME no one learns that without first making it happen. Hafer's approach looks like something that might be useful for a lot of students.  I definitely would try that, but I don't think the ladies will lie on their backs with their legs in the air.

 

BK

post #9 of 9
Fwiw, perhaps this thread belongs in the instruction and coaching forum?

zenny
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › Does This Represent Current PSIA Teaching?