Originally Posted by bud heishman
Sorry, I may have made some blanket statements when I was more focused on what I saw in TDK's video and communicated my point poorly.
not a problem... Its hard to follow the red text exactly but I will take a stab at it.
I believe I eluded to the my weight being shifted toward the outside ski as a result of turning forces created (inertia).
That is what I understood you to mean and that would be entirely passive, I agree.
Weight is also transferred immediately when we create turning forces? but it is a consequence of turning first.
Well turning first, means you have to get the skis turning before you get to the outside ski. That's certainly one possibility but I don't see it as optimal or something I would want to encourage all of the time. being a "consequence of turning first", how does the outside ski go about turning?
Perhaps I have been a bit cloudy in that I see I have coupled "passive" with everything moving in the intended direction and "active" with movements away from the intended direction. I can see your point here! Perhaps I should reserve that for negative and positive movements. Negative, not necessarily bad, just not in the intended direction of travel.
hehe fair enough. Negative is probably not the best word to use in that light if its not necessarily bad. but then you have to realize that I'm coming from a world that I do not like the idea of pushing or projecting ourselves into the turn. I think its ok to relax and release and ALLOW the CoM to move across and into the new turn. I also think its important to counter balance as you do this in order to retain balance. This is a level of refinement. Its allowing yourself to move inside with a clear release, while doing so in balance.
The thing I don't like about TDK's up-stem move more than anything else is that in order to stem the uphill ski, not only does he move his weight there, but he has to push off of the downhill ski to do it. Therefore the downhill ski will not be released, because its being used as an anchor point to be able to stem the uphill ski. That is the big problem there.
I think we are very much in agreement about the importance of a release and to allowing the CoM to move across into the new turn... The only refinement I am adding, is to counter balance as you do that in order to achieve a more refined state of balance. This is not the opposite of releasing..its releasing in balance.
I agree it is possible, just not sold that it is always desirable?
Well I don't like to talk in absolutes, so I will concede there could certainly be some case where being purely banked with no counter balancing whatsoever will be in balance and not need counter balancing to be in balance at least for some moments in time. Theoretically. In practical terms though, I think that is waxing philosophical and most of the time counter balancing is crucial.
Another important point is that the order with which we edge the skis and create balance on the outside ski matters. it matters a lot. gravity is always acting on us, so as soon as you are inclined, then gravity will be pulling your CoM to the ground unless there is sufficient centripetal forces from edge engagement to support that inclination in balance. But how do you get the centripetal forces? You get them from edging your skis and obtaining a reactionary force. And there is most definitely some delay between when you edge and when the centripetal forces come. In order to edge your skis you have to incline your legs. If you incline your legs without counter balance, then you will be moving your CoM inside quite a lot in order to get even a little bit of edging of the skis...and before the skis have even had a chance to engage and create centripetal forces yet. You will be: OUT OF BALANCE. Perhaps momentarily, but out of balance none the less. And when you go out of balance to the inside, you also compromise engagement on the outside ski. That is putting the cart before the horse.
Conversely, if you incline your legs to tip the skis, while also counter balancing, you will be able to edge the skis before the centripetal forces are there to support balancing the CoM inside. The CoM should move inside as balance requires...not as a means to create the edge angles. Counter balancing is how you can tip your skis, while retaining balance of the CoM. Then the CoM should move inside to match the developing centripetal forces that come from tipping the skis. This is particularly true if you want the outside ski to perform.
Also this is even more true at slow speeds. At fast speeds its quite a bit easier to throw yourself inside, edge the skis, create some centripetal forces to catch yourself with around the fall line. At slower speeds gravity has a bigger effect on you then centripetal forces...so counter balancing is actually quite crucial in slower speed turns to be able to create edge angles in the skis even before allowing the CoM to move inside where gravity can take it. The slower you go, the more you need counter balancing in order to effectively tip the skis. But this balance refinement applies to all levels of skiers.
I think an awful lot of pretty decent skiers are not skiing as well in balance as they could be, primarily because their movements are PUSH oriented and its very difficult to push your CoM into the turn and retain balance. More often people will talk about so called "dynamic balance", inferring that its ok to throw yourself out of balance intentionally since you can get it back milliseconds later. But I view that as rationalization for poor balance skills. It is not necessary to throw yourself out of balance, and many many skiers will benefit from striving for balance, even while creating big edge angles and big inclination. Counter balancing is how to do that. The more in balance you are, the more the outside ski will hook up and perform for you. Why munge that up at the top of the turn?