or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Two kinds of Wedge Christie - Page 8

Quote:
Originally Posted by yogaman

"exaggerated counter balance" is an oxymoron.    One is either balanced or not balanced.  We can balance over the outside ski, we can balance over the inside ski or we can balance over both skis.   We can balance over skis with low edge angles or over skis with high edge angles.   What is your intent?  If your intent is to achieve high edge angles in the high C portion of the turn and be balanced over the outside ski then you had better be counter balancing with the upper body.   YM

I can stand on my floor and balance on one foot with the slightest of counter balancing or I can exaggerate my angles to the max moving my hips as far as possible to one side while counter balancing with my head in the other.  Both positions are in balance, one is just more "exaggerated".  This is all I meant to convey YM.  Sorry if I confused.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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?

Quote:

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.

Quote:
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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

I can stand on my floor and balance on one foot with the slightest of counter balancing or I can exaggerate my angles to the max moving my hips as far as possible to one side while counter balancing with my head in the other.  Both positions are in balance, one is just more "exaggerated".  This is all I meant to convey YM.  Sorry if I confused.

I think there is something to be said, particularly with wedge turns, where some skiers will really move massive amounts of their balance over to the outside ski in an exaggerated C shape.  Well this is not really good balance because the skier is not learning how to release their inside ski and move across.  In a wedge turn it is not necessary to do that and will work against the skier in terms of allowing a good release habit to form.  What YM said is true...you can tip your skis a lot and counter balance exceedingly.  in balance is in balance.  But...if the skier doesn't learn to cross over as the centripetal forces begin to form, then that is not good either.

Sometimes teaching beginners a lot of instructors will have to teach this exaggeration in order to get the students to learn how pressure on the outside ski will make it turn.  Ok, but if the skier learns to just plop onto the outside ski and ride it around, then they are missing an important learning process related to releasing.

So on that I am totally in agreement with Bud..  But I also think that the releasing mindset can be taken to an extreme at the expense of good counter balance, even in wedge turns.  Both elements need to be there.  In a wedge turn only a little bit of counter balance is needed because the skier doesn't need to achieve complete balance on the outside ski.  But in my view its critical they learn to let the ski do the turning, rather then twisting the ski in order to get it to turn.  That will happen only if the ski engages, which means the greater share of their weight focused on the outside ski.

If you want to balance over the outside ski, you had better counter balance.  If you want to balance against centrifugal  forces you had better incline.  If you incline and want to be balanced over the outside ski you had better counter balance as well.   Most  turns require a little bit of both.    YM

There's another problem I think.  I see some skiers /instructors work on the release with no effort to counterbalance and they end up with too much balance over the inside ski.  Then I see this carry right up thru their skiing.  They wonder why they have no grip on icy conditions.  YM

Ok, I will meet you in the middle on counter balancing. I guess I have been a bit prejudiced about "counter balancing" with it having a contrived or excessive effort to angulate before the fall line.  I agree we incline to balance against the turning forces and angulate to adjust edge angles, and manage the Cm through transitions.  I just think it's ugly skiing when I see skiers trying to create high edge angles early in the turns without enough momentum to make it work so they "counter balance" to keep from falling over.  Unfortunately that is the image that pops into my mind when I hear the counter balance term.  When counter balancing as BTS describes it is a very functional concept as long as it is not overdone or contrived.

Yoga man, I agree that many skiers and instructors get caught inside and do not manage the pressure from ski to ski directing pressure to the outside ski, very well.   This also causes difficulty with transitions and parallel initiations.  Using your term, they should be more counter balanced over the downhill ski at completions to facilitate the edge release and edge change.  I think we can agree here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by epic

The way I see it, there are two wedge christies. One is the wedge christie that a new skier does unintentionally. The second is the one that instructor candidates try to do in order to pass an exam.

What do you see as the similarities and the differences.

Trick question! They both suck.

What I see at all levels as well is that skiers attempting to release the old outside downhill ski by starting and  moving  the COM down hill.  The release needs to start at the feet and progress upwards while still remaining balanced over the new outside ski.   Starting the process by focusing on the COM moving leads to too much weight on the new inside ski.    This is of course considering that you could do a weighted release  as in a white pass turn, however, you still want the release beginning at the feet, otherwise you may wind up out of balance.    YM

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

Ok, I will meet you in the middle on counter balancing. I guess I have been a bit prejudiced about "counter balancing" with it having a contrived or excessive effort to angulate before the fall line.  I agree we incline to balance against the turning forces and angulate to adjust edge angles, and manage the Cm through transitions.  I just think it's ugly skiing when I see skiers trying to create high edge angles early in the turns without enough momentum to make it work so they "counter balance" to keep from falling over.  Unfortunately that is the image that pops into my mind when I hear the counter balance term.  When counter balancing as BTS describes it is a very functional concept as long as it is not overdone or contrived.

I would say that much of what we see on the slopes is contrived.  Until the skier truly masters their craft, much of their effort is less than ideal.  Most new movements require that we overdue or exaggerate the new movement in order to begin to sense what it's about and incorporate it into our repertoire.  As someone mentioned a while back in another thread,   there is a Japanese word for nothing x-tra.  That's where the  beauty is.  Just doing just enough with nothing x-tra.   YM

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

Ok, I will meet you in the middle on counter balancing. I guess I have been a bit prejudiced about "counter balancing" with it having a contrived or excessive effort to angulate before the fall line.  I agree we incline to balance against the turning forces and angulate to adjust edge angles, and manage the Cm through transitions.  I just think it's ugly skiing when I see skiers trying to create high edge angles early in the turns without enough momentum to make it work so they "counter balance" to keep from falling over.  Unfortunately that is the image that pops into my mind when I hear the counter balance term.  When counter balancing as BTS describes it is a very functional concept as long as it is not overdone or contrived.

Yoga man, I agree that many skiers and instructors get caught inside and do not manage the pressure from ski to ski directing pressure to the outside ski, very well.   This also causes difficulty with transitions and parallel initiations.  Using your term, they should be more counter balanced over the downhill ski at completions to facilitate the edge release and edge change.  I think we can agree here?

Cheers bud. I just want to clarify one last point. You said above that we inclinate to balance the CoM against centripetal forces and we angulate to adjust edge angle. I want to be clear that last bit about angulating to adjust edge angle is not what I meant. I view ski tipping and angulating as separate tasks. I angulate in order to counter balance. The reason I counter balance is because I am tipping my feet which tends to move some part of the body inside, i.e. Inclinates it. Angulation is a counter balancing response to the inclination outcome which is a result of ski tipping activity. The tipping of the skis happens from the feet for me, not from the hip. The hip moves inside as an outcome of crossover momentum and actions in the feet and legs that allow it to happen, mainly releasing. So inclination is an OUTCOME of that. Angulation is an outcome of counter balancing so that the above inclination will not be excessive.

I view angulation as a result of upper body work and has very little to do with what the ski edges are doing.

I view inclination as a result of foot work, but the important here is that it's a RESULT of what the feet and legs are doing, not the other way around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogaman

What I see at all levels as well is that skiers attempting to release the old outside downhill ski by starting and  moving  the COM down hill.  The release needs to start at the feet and progress upwards while still remaining balanced over the new outside ski.   Starting the process by focusing on the COM moving leads to too much weight on the new inside ski.    This is of course considering that you could do a weighted release  as in a white pass turn, however, you still want the release beginning at the feet, otherwise you may wind up out of balance.    YM

A weighted release is perfectly fine sometimes. The main problem with thinking about moving the CoM in order to tip the feet, IMHO, is that it usually ends up being more of a push across then a release. It's extremely hard to push across and counter balance at the same time. Counter balancing is equally important Ina weighted release. It's just that the first few moments of the turn init will happen on the LTE of the downhill ski. But the skier should have adjusted to balance on the BTE of the outside ski by the fall line. All the same things need to happen, including counter balancing, its just a little DIRT difference.

However I agree with you that what I see all over the mountain are people PUSHING themselves into the turn. This method is generally devoid of ankle work and devoid of counter balancing. And they are out of balance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogaman

I would say that much of what we see on the slopes is contrived.  Until the skier truly masters their craft, much of their effort is less than ideal.  Most new movements require that we overdue or exaggerate the new movement in order to begin to sense what it's about and incorporate it into our repertoire.  As someone mentioned a while back in another thread,   there is a Japanese word for nothing x-tra.  That's where the  beauty is.  Just doing just enough with nothing x-tra.   YM

Would you agree that most of this contrived and extra effort comes from fighting the mountain instead of working with gravity.  It would seem most of the impediments skiers experience are related to the fear of letting go, of moving with gravity in a dance rather than fighting scraping and clawing down the mountain in an attempt to slow down.  As has been discussed here on Epic many times, learning to find the right intent to turn and skiing a slow enough line as fast as possible is the secret to finding the path to expert skiing.  As we discuss these low level tasks like wedges and wedge christies we find the perfect opportunity in an unthreatening environment to introduce skiers to this intent.  If we lose this moment, skiers tend to migrate toward the defensive intent and develop bad habits that haunt their skiing careers.

Letting go and flowing across the skis is a tough one for many skiers, including extremely high level skiers that get hooked on cross under moves.  No doubt Bud.  And I also think its important to introduce this idea to L1-3 wedge turners, of dropping the gate on the inside ski and allowing themselves to flow that way.

HOWEVER...  this is often taken too far to the point of losing engagement on the outside ski.  the skiers will tend to twist the ski into the fall line to compensate for deficient engagement.  The reason for the deficiency is lack of counter balancing as they try to move inside too much.

Its important to note, that in a wedge turn, it is not necessary for the CoM to be inside so much.  In fact the CoM will not be inside of the inside ski like it is in parallel turns.  It will be in between the two skis.  The outside is already on edge, it doesn't need to be moved more on edge.  It only needs to be pressured.  That's it.  So the idea of relaxing the inside leg is good, I agree and the CoM needs to flow that way, but not in a large movement inside.

Its a very fine balancing act between moving inside and counter balancing to engage the outside ski.  Too much over the outside skis is wrong.  Too much moving inside is wrong.  I have found when teaching those levels that if I focus too much on moving inside, they have problems engaging the outside ski and keep asking how to make the ski turn.  Many instructors will teach to twist the ski about that time, but I do not.  I teach to find the place in the middle where the CoM does move inside in a functional way, while balancing on the outside ski and engaging it.  The skis turn without twisting them, that is a huge part of the benefit of a wedge progression, to discover that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

Would you agree that most of this contrived and extra effort comes from fighting the mountain instead of working with gravity.  It would seem most of the impediments skiers experience are related to the fear of letting go, of moving with gravity in a dance rather than fighting scraping and clawing down the mountain in an attempt to slow down.  As has been discussed here on Epic many times, learning to find the right intent to turn and skiing a slow enough line as fast as possible is the secret to finding the path to expert skiing.  As we discuss these low level tasks like wedges and wedge christies we find the perfect opportunity in an unthreatening environment to introduce skiers to this intent.  If we lose this moment, skiers tend to migrate toward the defensive intent and develop bad habits that haunt their skiing careers.

You are absolutely right.  I have done the unmentionable which is I have been teaching/coaching my sig. other to ski.    Starting skiing at age 54 and after a couple less than ideal lessons, she said..."I just want you to teach me".  The one issue I have tried my best to  be extremely cognizant of is to never place her in threatening situations or conditions which are way  beyond her ability.   As a result she has been able to build a skiing base which is based on offensive rather than defensive habits.  I also offer this advice to many of my students, that is; do not let your friends, husband, boyfriend, girlfriend push you uncomfortably beyond your ability, just so you can go where they want you to go.  I'm a great believer in tilting the slope slowly for the newer skiers so the skier has the opportunity to develop  good habits.  My efforts with my SO has paid off  in seeing her negotiate all but the toughest trails now after 6 years skiing.    YM

Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683

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 there is a lot of substance in what you have said here.  For decades the skiing community has preached how skiing  is made up of the three basic skills and how those skills work in conjunction with balancing  to create the art of skiing.   But I think the real understanding of the relationship between balancing, counter balancing, centrifugal force, edge angle and inclination are interrelated has been deficient.   M

Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683

Letting go and flowing across the skis is a tough one for many skiers, including extremely high level skiers that get hooked on cross under moves.  No doubt Bud.  And I also think its important to introduce this idea to L1-3 wedge turners, of dropping the gate on the inside ski and allowing themselves to flow that way.

HOWEVER...  this is often taken too far to the point of losing engagement on the outside ski.  the skiers will tend to twist the ski into the fall line to compensate for deficient engagement.  The reason for the deficiency is lack of counter balancing as they try to move inside too much.

Its important to note, that in a wedge turn, it is not necessary for the CoM to be inside so much.  In fact the CoM will not be inside of the inside ski like it is in parallel turns.  It will be in between the two skis.  The outside is already on edge, it doesn't need to be moved more on edge.  It only needs to be pressured.  That's it.  So the idea of relaxing the inside leg is good, I agree and the CoM needs to flow that way, but not in a large movement inside.

Its a very fine balancing act between moving inside and counter balancing to engage the outside ski.  Too much over the outside skis is wrong.  Too much moving inside is wrong.  I have found when teaching those levels that if I focus too much on moving inside, they have problems engaging the outside ski and keep asking how to make the ski turn.  Many instructors will teach to twist the ski about that time, but I do not.  I teach to find the place in the middle where the CoM does move inside in a functional way, while balancing on the outside ski and engaging it.  The skis turn without twisting them, that is a huge part of the benefit of a wedge progression, to discover that.

I do not encourage "flowing across the skis" to beginners, rather releasing the edge angle with a slight extension and rolling of the ankle.  It is a very small move which barely affects the Cm. which remains between the base of support, yet migrates side to side with increased forces as the skier remains balanced against the outside ski.   The weight bias should always be more on the outside ski and advocating releasing the edge to move into a turn should not preclude this.  In fact, the edge release immediately causes the weight shift to outside ski without conscious counter balancing, though I would concede that a small bit occurs naturally.

In a dream world I would rather teach a beginner to do pivot slips, mastering fulcrum turning before we develop edging and pressure to turn.  I find this is the skill that is lacking in so many skiers up to the intermediate level.  They have learned edge and pressure but seriously lack the ability to turn the legs beneath the pelvis, after all it is a very foreign feeling we don't experience in everyday life like we do edging and pressure.  It is very easy to bring edge and pressure into the picture as needed.

I love to introduce and practice pivot slips with instructors who can not make a parallel turn entry because they are stuck in the edge and pressure, stemming corner.  After spending hours working to where the skier can travel straight down the fall line making zero direction change doing pivot slips, it is very easy to then blend is small amounts of edge angle to begin shaping very skidded turns then progressively adding more edge angle while simultaneously reducing the amount of pivoting until we can ski across the spectrum to railroad track carved turns.  Owning this whole spectrum is mandatory to become a true expert.

I realize there are other schools of thought out there, that poo poo pivoting.  That's too bad.  Understanding and perfecting the rotary skills in skiing is very important in my mind.  Managing rotary movements effectively is the key.  Associating rotary skill with uncontrolled pivoting to initiate turns is extremely short sighted when rotary control encompasses so so much more.

I digress.

Edited by bud heishman - 10/24/15 at 6:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

I do not encourage "flowing across the skis" to beginners, rather releasing the edge angle with a slight extension and rolling of the ankle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

The weight bias should always be more on the outside ski and advocating releasing the edge to move into a turn should not preclude this.  In fact, the edge release immediately causes the weight shift to outside ski without conscious counter balancing, though I would concede that a small bit occurs naturally

I know from my own demos that a slight bit of counter balance is necessary.  It very well may be that you and your students do it without thinking about it.  Its not as crucial as parallel turns because in a wedge turn the balance does not have to be as perfectly on the outside ski.  It just needs to be biased there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

In a dream world I would rather teach a beginner to do pivot slips, mastering fulcrum turning before we develop edging and pressure to turn.  I find this is the skill that is lacking in so many skiers up to the intermediate level.  They have learned edge and pressure but seriously lack the ability to turn the legs beneath the pelvis, after all it is a very foreign feeling we don't experience in everyday life like we do edging and pressure.  It is very easy to bring edge and pressure into the picture as needed.

In this regard we part ways.  I am 100% opposed to teaching beginners to twist their skis.  I view rotary as an important advanced skill, but also totally destructive as a foundation for beginners.  In my world, teaching them to twist their skis is teaching them to not use the tools on their feet as they are designed to be used.  I hear you that pivot slips, pivoting and general rotary skills are important and I think once a skier has a foundation of getting the ski to perform, they can begin to play with those rotational movements, but with care, because rotary is utterly destructive to ski performance if not handled with care.  Anyway, we've beaten that horse to death...

You keep mentioning "fulcrum turning".  What is it you mean exactly by that?  I'm genuinely curious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

I love to introduce and practice pivot slips with instructors who can not make a parallel turn entry because they are stuck in the edge and pressure, stemming corner.  After spending hours working to where the skier can travel straight down the fall line making zero direction change doing pivot slips, it is very easy to then blend is small amounts of edge angle to begin shaping very skidded turns then progressively adding more edge angle while simultaneously reducing the amount of pivoting until we can ski across the spectrum to railroad track carved turns.  Owning this whole spectrum is mandatory to become a true expert.

I have no problem with bringing rotary skill to other instructors, as opposed to my previous comments about beginners.

But I do want to say a bit more too, instructors and higher level students which are stuck in the stemming corner you mentioned.  I know what you are talking about, but I do not think that is because of edging and pressure as you seem to indicate.  Its because of deficient releasing and tipping skills.  If the skier releases the downhill ski, and further goes on to tip the downhill ski to the LTE, everything will fall into place...there is no need to actually twist the skis.  Its an OPTION of course.. pivot entries are always an option.  But I do not view that is the only way to enter a turn cleanly, even with a brushed speed controlled edge...no pivot is strictly necessary.  Getting them to do pivot slips will certainly show them the pivot-entry way to get around the fact they are not releasing and tipping enough, or break their habit of up-stemming.  But another approach to fix them is to focus hard core on the tipping aspect of the downhill ski in particular, rather then twisting it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bud heishman

I realize there are other schools of thought out there, that poo poo pivoting.  That's too bad.  Understanding and perfecting the rotary skills in skiing is very important in my mind.  Managing rotary movements effectively is the key.  Associating rotary skill with uncontrolled pivoting to initiate turns is extremely short sighted when rotary control encompasses so so much more.

Well as I said, I'm not meaning to "poo poo" pivoting.  Just saying, there is a time and place for it and there is also a time and place for not pivoting..and neither one is inferior, they both have their pros and cons.  A pivot entry misses high-c engagement opportunities, forcing the skier to control their speed in the fall line and below the fall line.  On the other hand, if the skier needs to get to the fall line RIGHT NOW or does not have room enough to shape the top of a turn, then a pivot is certainly on order!  Conversely, a tipped entry provides high-C engagement, including brushed engagement possibilities which can control the speed during high-C.  The downside is that a full turn shape has to happen to complete the turn, which requires just a little more space and time then a pivot entry.  There are pros and cons.  I personally prefer the control and refinement of a non-pivot entry whenever possible, but I pivot enter turns all the time as well when I have tol...  It doesn't have to be all one or the other approach really does it?

I also want to say that the mechanism of tipping, without twisting, can also induce a pivot entry to a certain limited degree.  So one reason to focus on tipping entries, instead of twisted entries, is because it covers both areas by just using some DIRT, and tends to keep the pivot entries a little more under control as well.  Of course if you really need a very large pivot entry right now, then by all means twist your feet and legs!

I also think that the skill of rotary does not only apply to pivot entries.  It applies simply to the way we keep our femurs loose in our hip sockets.  I like to think of this skill as the lubricant in the hip socket that enables the skis to be free to do what they are designed to do.  For this reason, I think even carve-a-holics like Ghost should practice pivot slips.

Anyway, my turn to digress...

Would you agree that if you ski, to any degree, into and out of counter, something is twisting?

I will be happy to explain fulcrum turning mechanism later, family movie time starting now...........

I'm definitely interested in the fulcrum thing so please yes explain that later.

Regarding this question:

Quote:
Would you agree that if you ski, to any degree, into and out of counter, something is twisting?

As an absolute question.....no I would not, well depending on what you mean by "something is twisting".  Upper lower separation, and pivot entries are not the same thing.   HUGELY different.  I do recognize that many PSIA DECL's use upper/lower separation as a visual indicator that some kind of steering must, in their mind, be taking place, but I do not agree that this has to involve twisting the legs to achieve, and especially does not require the skis to be pivoted to achieve.

I view the creation of counter as being something that is created with upper body counter acting movements, which are not simple to explain exactly so I won't try now, but suffice it to say that I view this as an upper body discipline, not anything related to twisting the legs.

The skis might even be arcing very purely while doing this and "skiing into counter".  No rotary from the legs is needed, and in fact would be destructive in the arcing case.  The counter is created by counter-acting with the upper half.

I view steering as another subject way beyond this thread, there have been many attempts to discuss it and nobody ever agrees here about how to make steering work, so we probably shouldn't get into that yet again, but suffice it to say, that I do not feel twisting the legs is required to "steer".  The skis will do a lot of self-steering just by being setup into a brushed engagement.  That, combined with upper body discipline, will result in the upper/lower separation that seems to be a visual cue for many that steering is happening.  But I am telling you, I do not twist my legs to steer ever. I do it all with edge manipulation and very carefully avoidance of twisting my skis.    Yet I achieve upper lower separation and peers sometimes comment to me that my "steering" is impressive to them.

Am I "steering" if I'm not twisting my feet or legs to accomplish it?  Well whether to use the word "steering" or not is an interesting discussion, but the point is, upper lower separation is achieved, the skis are taken on a shorter smeared radius then otherwise...any DECL watching will think I'm steering.

Mind you, the hip socket lubricant theory still applies.

BTS,

Are you seriously suggesting that many DECLs can't do the most basic simple MA? Their divisions have invested effort training and selecting them. Every L2 should be able to do this ... and well.

I'm not going to make such a broad criticism as you are implying SE.  DECL's have put a lot of time and energy into getting good at what they do, and there are in fact many good things they can MA perfectly great, including both simple and complex situations.  There are differences of opinion of course about the techniques espoused, but that does not take away from their craftsmanship at the PSIA-way of skiing.

However biases do exist...in all groups of people and it does effect their thinking...

In general, PSIA thinking is usually biased by the notion that upper lower separation can only be created by steering the skis under a magically stable upper half.

Therefore if they see upper lower separation, they can conclude that good steering skills are being used, and their biased definition of steering is also that femur rotary is used to accomplish steering.

When PSIA peers twist and are able to execute perfectly, its very hard to see the difference between that and someone else like me that is steering without twisting. And if your bias is to think its not even possible to steer without twisting, then you will not even be looking for it.  And its understandable that if you tried to look for it, having that bias, you would not even know what to look for in that particular case.

I will say that my awareness of the ability to steer without twisting, has caused me to view PSIA peers in a different light, I can now see clearly when the twisting isn't working out so well.  Take inter ski 2015 for example and all the wedge entries we saw from our PSIA team.  For me that was clear as day they were trying to twist their skis and for whatever the reason it wasn't working out too well.  Meanwhile the aussies and others focused a lot more on tipping the inside ski and generally their skis remained parallel considerably better.  A PSIA leader will respond now by saying, "well that was just poor execution that day, but the twisting method still works when its done right."  Ok, perhaps, but we'll have to wait another 4 years for a new PSIA team to demonstrate that at Interski.

Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683

As an absolute question.....no I would not, well depending on what you mean by "something is twisting".  Upper lower separation, and pivot entries are not the same thing.   HUGELY different.  I do recognize that many PSIA DECL's use upper/lower separation as a visual indicator that some kind of steering must, in their mind, be taking place, but I do not agree that this has to involve twisting the legs to achieve, and especially does not require the skis to be pivoted to achieve.

I view the creation of counter as being something that is created with upper body counter acting movements, which are not simple to explain exactly so I won't try now, but suffice it to say that I view this as an upper body discipline, not anything related to twisting the legs.

BTS: Try standing on one leg on the floor. Move from neutral to a position  where your hip and upper body faces towards the outside. At first try using only "upper body counter acting movements".(No arm swinging please , I guess we all agree on that..), then try to do the same move by twisting your leg.  Do you feel there is a difference in mucsles used?

There is a little ambiguity as to what is twisting and what is pivoting.

I stand to be corrected, but what I think BTS is avoiding teaching beginners is applying a torque from the body to the skis about an axis perpendicular to the snow surface.   I do not think he is advocating having no part of the body twist or rotate.

Upper lower separation and ski pivoting are completely different things.

Muscles used to twist the femurs are completely different then counter acting the upper half.

Beginners do not need to concern themselves with upper lower separation, it's not important at their level, they have much bigger things to worry about learning to feel the sweet spot of the ski as it performs for them. In fact I think as long as they are making wedge turns still, there is no reason to talk about upper lower separation no matter the way you talk about it, it's irrelevant. But even DTP methods also, it's not an important thing for them to worry about in the first days of skiing. It should be taught later as upper body discipline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683

I'm not going to make such a broad criticism as you are implying SE.  DECL's have put a lot of time and energy into getting good at what they do, and there are in fact many good things they can MA perfectly great, including both simple and complex situations.  There are differences of opinion of course about the techniques espoused, but that does not take away from their craftsmanship at the PSIA-way of skiing.

However biases do exist...in all groups of people and it does effect their thinking...

In general, PSIA thinking is usually biased by the notion that upper lower separation can only be created by steering the skis under a magically stable upper half.

Therefore if they see upper lower separation, they can conclude that good steering skills are being used, and their biased definition of steering is also that femur rotary is used to accomplish steering.

When PSIA peers twist and are able to execute perfectly, its very hard to see the difference between that and someone else like me that is steering without twisting. And if your bias is to think its not even possible to steer without twisting, then you will not even be looking for it.  And its understandable that if you tried to look for it, having that bias, you would not even know what to look for in that particular case.

I will say that my awareness of the ability to steer without twisting, has caused me to view PSIA peers in a different light, I can now see clearly when the twisting isn't working out so well.  Take inter ski 2015 for example and all the wedge entries we saw from our PSIA team.  For me that was clear as day they were trying to twist their skis and for whatever the reason it wasn't working out too well.  Meanwhile the aussies and others focused a lot more on tipping the inside ski and generally their skis remained parallel considerably better.  A PSIA leader will respond now by saying, "well that was just poor execution that day, but the twisting method still works when its done right."  Ok, perhaps, but we'll have to wait another 4 years for a new PSIA team to demonstrate that at Interski.

BTS, is your definition of steering without twisting in regards to steering the ski with progressive tipping only? Is there any other way to steer a non-carved turn without applying lateral twisting of the leg?

yes, it can and should be done without twisting the leg.

Pivoting is another matter.

Edited by borntoski683 - 10/25/15 at 5:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost

There is a little ambiguity as to what is twisting and what is pivoting.

I stand to be corrected, but what I think BTS is avoiding teaching beginners is applying a torque from the body to the skis about an axis perpendicular to the snow surface.   I do not think he is advocating having no part of the body twist or rotate.

This is exactly correct!  Both sides agree here!! Yeah!

The pivoting that we all poopoo is as you stated the uncontrollable, imprecise pivoting that originates in the torso and/or hips and is transferred to the skis.  Though this is a valid turning power it has serious disadvantages and is the bane of many skiers.  However, using the  "FULCRUM TURNING MECHANISM" or as Joubert dubbed it "Braquage" which is lower leg pivoting where the pelvis is the anchor for which both feet turn against (ie pivot slips) where there is zero upper body involvement and the intensity and duration of the turning power can be easily controlled and modulated.  This is what good skier use whether they are conscious of the fact or not.

I believe many recreational skiers migrate toward upper body rotation, which causes all the poopoo pivoting, because it is basic to human nature NOT because PSIA taught all these skiers to ski this way as some would suggest!  It is something we do in everyday life while walking or running around a corner.  The fulcrum turning mechanism must be learned as it is very unnatural to everyday human movements.  Hanging out in a bar and standing on two twisty barstools would help!

When I see students performing the rudimentary elements of fulcrum turning I quietly rejoice because I know from here the sky is the limit.  We can easily begin to integrate in more edge angle and begin to shape the turns better and better and lead quickly to very nice advanced parallel turning and arc to arc carving.  Conversely, teaching higher edge angles early in skier development is a recipe for very limited terrain skiers.

When we discuss edge release to begin turning, especially as slower speeds and lower level turning skills, it is this release that facilitates this turning mechanism to be implemented.  A skilled skier can choose to blend this lower leg pivoting (femurs rotating in the hip sockets) with edging anywhere along a spectrum from zero edge angle/maximum pivoting  all the way to the other end where there is zero pivoting/maximum edge angle.  a skier who has mastery of this whole spectrum is certainly a more versatile skier.

I believe the "brushing carve" is the same thing as a skier integrating the fulcrum turning mechanism and edge angles to shape the turn, someone just decided a new term was needed to differentiate their theory from the chaff.

Bud, great post.  A few clarifications or comments...

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

The pivoting that we all poopoo is as you stated the uncontrollable, imprecise pivoting that originates in the torso and/or hips and is transferred to the skis.  Though this is a valid turning power it has serious disadvantages and is the bane of many skiers.

This I think we all have universal agreement.  I certainly didn't mean to imply anywhere that PSIA teaches upper body rotary.  PSIA teaches leg rotary.  Perhaps its the fulcrum thing you keep mentioning, I need to understand a bit more about what that exactly means, but in general PSIA folks (with many exceptions), tend to believe that the legs need to be twisted in order to steer and/or pivot the skis, against what they imagine to be the stabilized upper half...   Any references I made in this thread about rotary were referring to that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

This is what good skier use whether they are conscious of the fact or not.

I don't agree with this absolute statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

I believe many recreational skiers migrate toward upper body rotation, which causes all the poopoo pivoting, because it is basic to human nature NOT because PSIA taught all these skiers to ski this way as some would suggest!  It is something we do in everyday life while walking or running around a corner.

This I agree with whole heartedly.  Basically they are able to use the outside ski like a sprinters block to push themselves into angular motion.  it comes quite naturally and actually does accomplish that particular thing quite well....rotary that is.  Unfortunately there are unintended consequences which follow, which is why its a bad idea to use that method.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

When I see students performing the rudimentary elements of fulcrum turning I quietly rejoice because I know from here the sky is the limit.  We can easily begin to integrate in more edge angle and begin to shape the turns better and better and lead quickly to very nice advanced parallel turning and arc to arc carving.  Conversely, teaching higher edge angles early in skier development is a recipe for very limited terrain skiers.

very much disagree.  :-)  First we should not talk in absolutes.  There is a time and place for everything.  But if we are going to favor one way over the other, I see it the other way around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

When we discuss edge release to begin turning, especially as slower speeds and lower level turning skills, it is this release that facilitates this turning mechanism to be implemented.  A skilled skier can choose to blend this lower leg pivoting (femurs rotating in the hip sockets) with edging anywhere along a spectrum from zero edge angle/maximum pivoting  all the way to the other end where there is zero pivoting/maximum edge angle.  a skier who has mastery of this whole spectrum is certainly a more versatile skier.

No argument about blending and DIRT and trying it all!  Tipping movements in the feet do require the femur to be lubricated in the hip socket..it has to move around there even while avoiding pivoting the skis!  There are many subtleties about why it makes sense to initiate these movements from the ankle and tibia rather then the femur and why a tipping movement is what is more effective most of the time, even resulting in self steering of the ski as well, UNLESS the skier specifically wants to pivot enter the skis into the turn.  That is also a viable option in my book , however the pros and cons of pivot entries need to be explored and it will be shown that most of the time a non-pivot entry is more desirable when you have time and space to shape the high-C portion of the turn.  That doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to pivot enter on demand, of course you should, but mostly what i see taught, demo'd by instructors and performed by skiers all over the mountain, is excessive pivot entry skiing, with most people entirely missing out on high-c turn shaping because of this.  This is because they have too much focus on twisting the legs to start the turns, and its totally unnecessary an awful lot of the time.  There is a better and more refined way that allows the SKI to do the self turning, rather then the skier using brute strength to twist the skis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bud heishman

I believe the "brushing carve" is the same thing as a skier integrating the fulcrum turning mechanism and edge angles to shape the turn, someone just decided a new term was needed to differentiate their theory from the chaff.

No.  Brush carving involves absolutely zilch twisted pivoting of the ski.  If you would like to discuss what that technique is, let me know, but it doesn't involve pivoting the ski.  Period.

Edited by borntoski683 - 10/25/15 at 6:28pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683

No.  Brush carving involves absolutely zilch pivoting of the ski.  If you would like to discuss what that technique is, let me know, but it doesn't involve pivoting the ski.  Period.

I asked for this to be defined a few weeks ago and was advised  that this had been discussed and I guess the concept came from HH and as a result was not to be discussed.  Yet in the past few days brushed carving has been mentioned several times.   I know what I think brushed carving is but I want to hear others definition of ths action is.  So go ahead.  YM

There is no need to explain it to you YM, I know you already have the same understanding that I have.  And truthfully I know this is a verboten subject for political reasons, so I will only address that subject here very carefully and mostly I will either counter incorrect points or answer questions, and also I do not particularly think those words are proprietary in nature nor should they be the exclusive domain of one particular teaching system.  But nonetheless, the current moderators of this forum consider that to be a subject which we can not discuss if we use exactly those words together.  hehe.  Silly, but that's how it is.  And there are certain personalities that will in fact come out of the wood work to create conflict if those words are used...so...  not sure..

but nonetheless, I stand by what I said a moment ago...lets just say....it is NOT a requirement to pivot the skis in order to get them to brush, skid, smear or whatever word you want to use.  You can  pivot them into smearing sure, but you don't have to and there are advantages to not doing so.  The word "carve" is attached to this method also for a reason, because carving implies movements which exclude or minimize pivoting.  Carving is about tipping the skis on edge and getting them to carve.  Do this with out edge lock and the skis will be smearing or brushing.  Whala.  No twisting or pivoting required.

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