or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › "Oversteering:" is this a term or a movement pattern that instructors use today?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Oversteering:" is this a term or a movement pattern that instructors use today? - Page 7

post #181 of 259
Thread Starter 

So standing "centered" over the ski as it moves forward, while not using any muscular rotary, and having the ski somewhat edged but without sufficient platform angle to carve, all this can cause the tails to slip more than the tips, thus creating a steering angle which will make the snow turn the ski?  I'm talking skidded turns here.

 

If yes, how does this intentional tail slippage happen without the tips being made to grip more than the tails?

post #182 of 259
Well I think the issue there is the front of the skis contribute to tbe self steering windvane effect. The front is longer, and it's wider than the middle.

If we're talking specifically tail slippage, then by definition tbe front is holding more or simply mure static then the tails.
post #183 of 259

If a ski with sidecut is moving forward then as soon as it is tipped on edge with pressure in the center a steering angle comes into existence and the ski begins to react with the snow surface and the ski and I begin to change direction. No rotary required.

Once following this curved path I can use pressure control, or rotary to cause the tails of the skis to displace more than the tips. Is this what you all are talking about?

post #184 of 259

For tipping angle less than critical, over-steering is used to increase steering angle, which up to a point (around 45-60 degrees depending) increases turning.  Under-steering cna be used to decrease steering angle.  It is not really that complicated.

post #185 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

For tipping angle less than critical, over-steering is used to increase steering angle, which up to a point (around 45-60 degrees depending) increases turning.  Under-steering cna be used to decrease steering angle.  It is not really that complicated.

 

Ghost, Finally, a suggested purpose! Where did you find that? In consideration of your earlier posts in this thread, this little tid-bit seems to be the results of some fresh research. So, what is the purpose behind the purpose? - why do we want to manually increase and/or decrease the steering angle? Feathering the turn to the terrain and chosen speed? Or for just one or two turns to shave off some speed?  While we are here, am I correct that, while the steering angle and skid angle may be described differently, they both represent the same angle as determined by the direction of momentum (or CoM) vs the direction of the skis at any given moment in the turn?

 

Anyone? ..... Behuler? ......... Behuler?

post #186 of 259
If I get it right LF, how RLM's term fits in your toolbox is the key. Do you lever forward to make the tips grip and the tails slip? Does that include rotary in spite of the fact that RLM defines none in the oversteered turn? Perhaps we need to explore the how. Taken literally the implication would be staying square to the skis as you turn. Is that really what RLM suggests? Or is it more the case of allowing passive rotation where rotationally countered stances are a possible outcome. Tip lead and inside half lead are related here and while I cannot speak for Ron I seriously doubt he was suggesting always square stances but maybe an e mail to Ron might clear all of this up.
post #187 of 259
Thread Starter 

I've never done this "oversteering" consciously.  I wish snow were out there so I could figure out if I do this unconsciously.

Given the meandering responses of people to this topic, I don't think there's much talk of intentionally doing this "oversteering" thing.

But that doesn't mean people aren't using this process, just that they aren't talking about it much.

It was his statement that it was very common and critically important that got my attention this time I read though the book.

 

He didn't pair a discussion of stance with his discussion of making a steering angle happen by weighting the tips more than the tails on moderately edged skis and letting the skis do their thing (oversteering).

post #188 of 259

LF,

 

In the forty odd years that I have been skiing one constant in ski instruction has been some form of pressuring the tips of the skis early in the 'turn'. Whether expressed as "get forward", 'stuff the tips into the bump", "pressure the tips of the skis", "bend front of the skis more than the back" or any of several other ways to express it the outcome is to induce some degree of the 'oversteer' that RLM talks about. So yea, most folk probably unconsciously use this to some degree and it probably accounts for some of what is called passive rotary by some.

 

My personal thoughts on the matter are that I want to minimize disproportional tail displacement in all my skiing..While it might sometimes be necessary I just dislike the feeling of the tails coming around.

 

fom

post #189 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

For tipping angle less than critical, over-steering is used to increase steering angle, which up to a point (around 45-60 degrees depending) increases turning.  Under-steering cna be used to decrease steering angle.  It is not really that complicated.

 

Ghost, Finally, a suggested purpose! Where did you find that? In consideration of your earlier posts in this thread, this little tid-bit seems to be the results of some fresh research. So, what is the purpose behind the purpose? - why do we want to manually increase and/or decrease the steering angle? Feathering the turn to the terrain and chosen speed? Or for just one or two turns to shave off some speed?  While we are here, am I correct that, while the steering angle and skid angle may be described differently, they both represent the same angle as determined by the direction of momentum (or CoM) vs the direction of the skis at any given moment in the turn?

 

Anyone? ..... Behuler? ......... Behuler?


Not new, just further back in the memory banks, I've spent my recent years concentrating on arc-2-arc skiing, with brief periods doing smeared short radius turns in moguls. 

 

Steering angle is adjusted in conjunction with and independently from edge angle to vary the amount of turning and the amount of slowing down in the final product (turn).  You can vary both steering angle and tipping angle independently creating different paths and speeds in those paths in a smeared turn.

post #190 of 259
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman View Post
 

LF,

 

In the forty odd years that I have been skiing one constant in ski instruction has been some form of pressuring the tips of the skis early in the 'turn'. Whether expressed as "get forward", 'stuff the tips into the bump", "pressure the tips of the skis", "bend front of the skis more than the back" or any of several other ways to express it the outcome is to induce some degree of the 'oversteer' that RLM talks about. So yea, most folk probably unconsciously use this to some degree and it probably accounts for some of what is called passive rotary by some.

 

My personal thoughts on the matter are that I want to minimize disproportional tail displacement in all my skiing..While it might sometimes be necessary I just dislike the feeling of the tails coming around.

 

fom


Well, yes, of course I've heard to pressure the tips at initiation, and that is usually coupled with being told to move back at turn completion.  I've also heard to stay centered instead, no no don't go fore-aft any more, not on shaped skis.  And I've read endless debates here at Epic about whether to get "forward" over the shovels/tips or "forward" in time down the hill, or "forward" diagonally as in foragonally.  

 

So you're saying that if one is not carving arc-to-arc, but instead doing basic parallel turns, nice and easy on groomed terrain, then getting forward over the tips/shovels at turn entry does indeed cause this loosening of the tails without any rotary input, that most everyone does it without even thinking.  And you're implying, I think, that in the instructor circles you travel in, there doesn't seem to be an acknowledgement that muscle-generated femur rotation isn't needed if you pressure the tips.  Or is it acknowledged?  In my circles, we are told to turn the skis, a la pivot slips.  Doing pivot slips that morph into schmeeeered turns was a standard morning drill at one point in my early days as an instructor.  Being told to get forward with no explanation of why or how it works was also part of my earlier training.  

 

But nothing was said that separated those two (get forward vs rotate the femurs/thighs/legs/skis) from each other, that identified them as two different approaches to getting the skis to turn when one wasn't focusing on carving arc-to-arc, or even gently riding the sidecut with some schmeering going on.

post #191 of 259

I would not think of it as loosening the tails.  You move forward to bend and engage the shovel more than anything else.  

 

I'm with FOM in that generally I am trying to prevent the tails from washing away more than encouraging them to do so more than they already will by simply letting them self steer in a brushed turn.  When the tail washes away, severe carving power is lost.  

 

So as soon as you enter into that world of the tail washing away, you enter into the land of something more akin to a pivot slip then a real turn.  You'll get the skis twisted out of the fall line where you can hockey stop slow down, otherwise known as Z turns.  But the loosening of the tail is going to be severe loss of carving deflection.  Carving deflection is what moves you on a curved path and also what gives you the continual joy of feeling and experiencing the centripetal forces of a carved turn.

 

In a brushed, feathered, smeared carve turn, compared to edge locked pure carving; there is a vast spectrum of possibility in terms of what you can make the ski do when its not in edge lock.  The ski literally starts to act a bit like an airplane wing against the snow, and how you stand on the ski in various forms of balance, how you are edged and the angle of attack(steering angle) can have huge impacts on how the moving snow hits the bent ski, the way wind hits an airplane wing, to create carving, skidding and self-steering characteristics.  It is extremely difficult to describe exactly that this approach or that approach will also do things a certain way.  Its a combination of numerous skier inputs in a very complex system of physics.  No ski book I have ever really read describes this stuff in its entirely or as A vs B, etc.. its way too complicated of a system with many variations based upon numerous possible inputs from the skier.

 

If you twist your legs in that mode, it definitely will effect things, for better or worse.  If you get extremely forward it will effect things.  If you get only a little forward it will effect things.  if you get back it will effect things.  if you tighten your leg muscles or relax your leg muscles it will effect things.  If you twist your legs to the point of twisting the skis it will effect things differently then if you twist your legs just enough to keep up with what the skis are doing on their own from self steering.  The amount of edge angle you have effects things.  The amount of initial steering angle effects things.  Its a very complex system and some of the things I mentioned so far work together effectively and sometimes they work against each other ineffectively.

 

I'm with FOM that generally speaking, if the tails are coaxed into too much "oversteering", then carving action will be compromised too much for my liking.   That includes twisting the skis out of enagement or leaning too far forward such that the the tails fan out on their own, or any other manner that causes the tails to fan out too much.  In my view that leads to either washout loss of control, or else chattering.

 

I would not think of RLM's oversteering thing as a bread and butter fundamental movement of every turn, but more as an additional little frosting on the cake that is always possible to pull out when you need to.


Edited by borntoski683 - 8/18/15 at 12:46pm
post #192 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

I would not think of it as loosening the tails.  You move forward to bend and engage the shovel more than anything else.  

 

I'm with FOM in that generally I am trying to prevent the tails from washing away more than encouraging them to do so more than they already will by simply letting them self steer in a brushed turn.  When the tail washes away, severe carving power is lost.  

 

So as soon as you enter into that world of the tail washing away, you enter into the land of something more akin to a pivot slip then a real turn.  You'll get the skis twisted out of the fall line where you can hockey stop slow down, otherwise known as Z turns.  But the loosening of the tail is going to be severe loss of carving deflection.  Carving deflection is what moves you on a curved path and also what gives you the continual joy of feeling and experiencing the centripetal forces of a carved turn.

 

In a brushed, feathered, smeared carve turn, compared to edge locked pure carving; there is a vast spectrum of possibility in terms of what you can make the ski do when its not in edge lock.  The ski literally starts to act a bit like an airplane wing against the snow, and how you stand on the ski in various forms of balance, how you are edged and the angle of attack(steering angle) can have huge impacts on how the moving snow hits the bent ski, the way wind hits an airplane wing, to create carving, skidding and self-steering characteristics.  It is extremely difficult to describe exactly that this approach or that approach will also do things a certain way.  Its a combination of numerous skier inputs in a very complex system of physics.  No ski book I have ever really read describes this stuff in its entirely or as A vs B, etc.. its way too complicated of a system with many variations based upon numerous possible inputs from the skier.

 

If you twist your legs in that mode, it definitely will effect things, for better or worse.  If you get extremely forward it will effect things.  If you get only a little forward it will effect things.  if you get back it will effect things.  if you tighten your leg muscles or relax your leg muscles it will effect things.  If you twist your legs to the point of twisting the skis it will effect things differently then if you twist your legs just enough to keep up with what the skis are doing on their own from self steering.  The amount of edge angle you have effects things.  The amount of initial steering angle effects things.  Its a very complex system and some of the things I mentioned so far work together effectively and sometimes they work against each other ineffectively.

 

I'm with FOM that generally speaking, if the tails are coaxed into too much "oversteering", then carving action will be compromised too much for my liking.   That includes twisting the skis out of enagement or leaning too far forward such that the the tails fan out on their own, or any other manner that causes the tails to fan out too much.  In my view that leads to either washout loss of control, or else chattering.

 

I would not think of RLM's oversteering thing as a bread and butter fundamental movement of every turn, but more as an additional little frosting on the cake that is always possible to pull out when you need to.

 

From the thread it sounds like oversteering is simply a term for an ineffective form of skiing. Steering is steering and oversteering is too much steering.

 

Now, apply the term oversteering to edge angle steering and we're cooking with gas!

post #193 of 259
Thread Starter 

Verbal communication is so difficult.

post #194 of 259

I would not go so far as to make an overly generalized statement.  Oversteering is simply a technique to manipulate fore-aft balance and have it effect things...possibly in some circumstances for good and possibly in some circumstances for worse.  

 

Here is a diagram I just whipped together:

 


This is overhead view looking down over a bent ski.  The snow is rushing by (indicated by the green lines) and creating reactionary forces against the edge of the ski.  Because the ski is bent, the front of the ski has more steering angle then the rear.  This has an airplane wing kind of effect, the tip gets pushed on more than the tails.  

 

In its most simple sense, this is what causes skis to turn, including arcing, smearing and everything else.  

 

The above shows why the ski will self-steer, which is to say, it will twist like a pinwheel relative to the feet in the middle of the ski.  The front of the ski will be pushed on more then the tail...so thus...the ski pinwheels.  

 

The above also shows why if a ski has sufficient edge angle it will "carve", which is to say it will be deflected in this case to the skier's left.

 

When the ski self steers and deflects at the same time, you have a ski turn.

 

Numerous factors can contribute to how the ski will be pinwheeled and deflected into a carved ski turn.  If the front of the ski has  way more pressure then the rear, then the ski/snow reactions will create a lot of angular momentum in the ski (ie, pinwheeling of the ski).   That is what happens when the tails wash out, fan out, twist out, etc.  (note that is not neccesarily "bad", it may be what you need in some situation, but its NOT a very good carve action and deflection to the skier's left in that case would be reduced significantly in favor of pin wheeling, also the skis will either go flat and lose engagement and speed control, or eventually chatter).

 

If the rear also has some decent reactionary force, due to fore-aft balance and sufficient edge angle, then the ski will still self-steer itself into a pin-wheeling effect, but in a reduced and more manageable way.  The ski will have more deflection to the skier's left in that case.  The most extreme case of this is an arcing turn where edge lock constrains pinwheeling to the absolute minimum and provides the maximum possible deflection to the skier's left.

 

So in the above; both fore-aft balance considerations, as well as edge angle, contribute to the way the front and rear of the ski will react to the snow like an airplane wing and turn the skier, with more or less pinwheeling (self steering) and more or less deflection (carving).

 

But all of the above is further complicated by overall steering angle, which effects both the front and the rear.  The more steering angle you have, the more the reaction force, and slowing of the ski, or slowing of each part of the ski at different rates, etc.  At some point the snow reaction will not be deflecting much to the side, but will have more of a slowing effect on the skier.  

 

In addition to that, a ski with a lot of steering angle will also react differently then small steering angle, and not in a consistent way either, because the edge angle and fore-aft balance all interacts with that in different ways too.   Large steering angle has more of a braking effect, smaller steering angle has more of a turning effect, and combined with high or low edge angles also has dramatically different outcomes...  Also the reactionary force ratio between the front and back is way different with a ski having minimal overall steering angle vs one with a lot of over all steering angle...which what we are really talking about is how much steering angle in the tail of the ski...perhaps that is Rick's "skid angle".  Lots of skid angle changes the reactionary force ratio between front and back...creating totally different dynamics, not neccessarily good for making ski turns.  A washed out tail generally is going to turn the skier less and pinwheel them more.  On the other hand if you pivot a lot and set the edges hard with a lot of skid angle...then the ski will abruptly change the direction its sliding and reduce its own steering angle in the process.

 

So now in terms of manipulating the airplane wing effect of the ski, so far we have edge angle, fore-aft balance, initial overall steering angle, and amount of ski bend....all influencing the way the ski interacts with the snow and makes a turn.

 

All of the above, without twisting the ski manually.

 

If you twist the ski manually, that will create more steering angle...and depending on numerous factors that might be ok or might not.  Highly edged skis generally will chatter if you try to do that.  flatter skis will tend to wash out when you do that as the rear of the ski in particular will lose engagement and pinwheel the ski.  But sometimes that is what you need to do too.

 

Hope you can see how complicated this is and its simply not as simple as approach A vs approach B.  There are numerous inputs that effect things in complicated ways

post #195 of 259
This may sound nitpicky but lift from an airplane wing is from above not below. Not sure skimming or surfing would be a better example but at least the push back from the water would be from below.
post #196 of 259

well true an airplane wing gets lift by creating lack of pressure on top of the wing and pressure on the bottom of the wing...  dunno...i think that's the same concept, the differential of pressure....causes movement.  There is no great vacume in the sky sucking planes upward, the plane flies through the air to create the pressure and differential of pressure between top and bottom creates lift.  As soon as a plane stops flying into the wind so to speak, it starts to drop like a rock.  

 

Its very much similar.  In particular, a plane that is making a turn has a lot of of this stuff going on too to make the plane turn.

 

Earlier someone commented that an airplane can go into wing stall by turning away from the pressure....  I view that is being similar to what happens when we try to twist our legs to steer in skiing.

 

No of course a bent ski is not shaped exactly like an airplane wing, and neither is boat rudder, but the concepts are all very similar, creating differentials in pressure turns linear momentum into both angular momentum and change of direction.

post #197 of 259

You guys are hard core. :)

post #198 of 259

It's a tall order to move fore enough that the tails just break free and fly wildly out to the side, with no supplementary skier generated rotary force helping them to do so.  Most skiers have likely never done this, and the rest, like FOM, don't like the feeling.  The more common form of oversteering would be just a slight disengagement of the tails, causing them to do an oh so slight, almost unnoticeable smear, thus slightly sharpening the turn.  In that form, it feels much more comfortable and controlled.

post #199 of 259
Thread Starter 

That sounds like what RLM was calling "oversteering."  Unfortunately it's a term that comes with baggage.

post #200 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

It's a tall order to move fore enough that the tails just break free and fly wildly out to the side, with no supplementary skier generated rotary force helping them to do so.  Most skiers have likely never done this, and the rest, like FOM, don't like the feeling.  The more common form of oversteering would be just a slight disengagement of the tails, causing them to do an oh so slight, almost unnoticeable smear, thus slightly sharpening the turn.  In that form, it feels much more comfortable and controlled.

 

In terms of breaking a ski out of edge lock, I totally agree with you here, leaning way forward is not going to do it without great difficulty.  What about a turn that is already in the state of being feathered....would leaning forward cause more oversteering to happen?

post #201 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post
 

It's a tall order to move fore enough that the tails just break free and fly wildly out to the side, with no supplementary skier generated rotary force helping them to do so.  Most skiers have likely never done this, and the rest, like FOM, don't like the feeling.  The more common form of oversteering would be just a slight disengagement of the tails, causing them to do an oh so slight, almost unnoticeable smear, thus slightly sharpening the turn.  In that form, it feels much more comfortable and controlled.

 

In terms of breaking a ski out of edge lock, I totally agree with you here, leaning way forward is not going to do it without great difficulty.  What about a turn that is already in the state of being feathered....would leaning forward cause more oversteering to happen?


A slightly edged ski, barely at the critical angle, will easily lose the tails when you try to pressure the tips.

A strongly edged ski, using counter balance to have the ski well past the critical angle will not release the tails so easily.

post #202 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

I would not go so far as to make an overly generalized statement.  Oversteering is simply a technique to manipulate fore-aft balance and have it effect things...possibly in some circumstances for good and possibly in some circumstances for worse.  

 

It is clear that anyone is struggling to say anything positive about "oversteer" as a beneficial technique. Otherwise, please educate me more specifically than "a technique to manipulate fore-aft balance and have it effect things". Being familiar with how you like to boil things down, that doesn't sound like you are saying anything at all. I think you are being political. :)  I have read the entire thread and cannot find anything other than descriptions of negatively symptomatic results. From the way I read this thread, it sounds like a skier would have to lean too far forward for "oversteer" to result while being in proper fore/aft balance for anything else. I don't think it is a technique per say but rather a term to describe a pervasive technical issue needing remedy.

 

I think Rick goes the furthest in packaging it as something almost sounding like something good - 

 

The more common form of oversteering would be just a slight disengagement of the tails, causing them to do an oh so slight, almost unnoticeable smear, thus slightly sharpening the turn.  In that form, it feels much more comfortable and controlled.

 

 

I'll go out on a limb and suggest that it is an issue that may be pervasive with aging advanced intermediate skiers who have the technique to start a decent turn but lacking the leg strength to finish it. They are slow, short radius turns with weight a bit to far forward, a tad too much swing (rotation) and resulting in tail wash during the release of centrifugal force. I think that, like Rick mentions, it is tail disengagement that feels comfortable, controlled, slight and unnoticeable. I feel that it may be an example of where a comfortable, controlled, slight and unnoticeable plateau happens.


Edited by Rich666 - 8/19/15 at 4:49pm
post #203 of 259

my answer would be that quite often it could be bad, depending on how its done and sometimes its a useful and good thing.  Not being politically correct, you oughta know me better than that!  ;)

 

RLM is describing how to get some steering out of the ski without twisting the legs to do it.  How is that bad?

post #204 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

 

 

RLM is describing how to get some steering out of the ski without twisting the legs to do it.  How is that bad?

 

I know you well enough, my non leg steering friend, to know your question is sincere, if not rhetorical.   :D

 

Always good to have an additional feline defurring tool inside Matilda.  

post #205 of 259

Rich, it seems like some video would be really valuable here, to show what different variations of applying this concept actually plays out to look like.  I know you have several variations in your head on how this could be done.  I do too.

post #206 of 259
Here is the reference image of the topic being discussed from Ultimate Skiing...I don't think Ron minds? Tails do not look uberly displaced...



zenny
post #207 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick View Post

I know you well enough, my non leg steering friend, to know your question is sincere, if not rhetorical.   biggrin.gif

Not a rhetorical question. Rich suggested I was being politically correct and that over steering is categorically bad according to him. I am asking him why he would think so.

Mind you, I will say it again, as a rule I am generally avoiding anything resembling a washout out most of the time I think, im sure rich and I are coming from very similar places.
Quote:
Always good to have an additional feline defurring tool inside Matilda.  

This I don't understand
post #208 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post
 

I would not go so far as to make an overly generalized statement.  Oversteering is simply a technique to manipulate fore-aft balance and have it effect things...possibly in some circumstances for good and possibly in some circumstances for worse.  

 

It is clear that anyone is struggling to say anything positive about "oversteer" as a beneficial technique. Otherwise, please educate me more specifically than "a technique to manipulate fore-aft balance and have it effect things". Being familiar with how you like to boil things down, that doesn't sound like you are saying anything at all. I think you are being political. :)  I have read the entire thread and cannot find anything other than descriptions of negatively symptomatic results. From the way I read this thread, it sounds like a skier would have to lean too far forward for "oversteer" to result while being in proper fore/aft balance for anything else. I don't think it is a technique per say but rather a term to describe a pervasive technical issue needing remedy.

 

I think Rick goes the furthest in packaging it as something almost sounding like something good - 

 

The more common form of oversteering would be just a slight disengagement of the tails, causing them to do an oh so slight, almost unnoticeable smear, thus slightly sharpening the turn.  In that form, it feels much more comfortable and controlled.

 

 

I'll go out on a limb and suggest that it is an issue that may be pervasive with aging advanced intermediate skiers who have the technique to start a decent turn but lacking the leg strength to finish it. They are slow, short radius turns with weight a bit to far forward, a tad too much swing (rotation) and resulting in tail wash during the release of centrifugal force. I think that, like Rick mentions, it is tail disengagement that feels comfortable, controlled, slight and unnoticeable. I feel that it may be an example of where a comfortable, controlled, slight and unnoticeable plateau happens.

Say you want to make a turn to the left before a steep drop off that you cannot see over on a narrow potentially crowded bumpy trail, so that you have some time going across the slope to eyeball the situation from the lip of the drop-off.  You could cleanly carve that turn carrying all your speed, but you risk going too fast for the conditions/collision risk.  You could smear the turn, killing some speed in the process.  Or you could oversteer past the steering angle that is the most efficient at turning you and blend more hockey stop into the turn resulting a path that is identical as the smeared turn, but with more speed dumped; that's only a bad thing if you don't want to slow down.

post #209 of 259
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 


Well, yes, of course I've heard to pressure the tips at initiation, and that is usually coupled with being told to move back at turn completion.  I've also heard to stay centered instead, no no don't go fore-aft any more, not on shaped skis.  And I've read endless debates here at Epic about whether to get "forward" over the shovels/tips or "forward" in time down the hill, or "forward" diagonally as in foragonally.  

forward with no explanation of why or how it works was also part of my earlier training.  

 

Watch some world cup montages and it's pretty obvious that the best in the world still move fore and aft on a ski to eke out the best performance on hard snow.  Try an experiment:  determine how to bend a ski while standing on very hard flat snow.  The only way I know how to do this is to move fore aft on the ski leveraging the tips or tails. Standing in the middle of a flat non edged  ski on hard snow does not bend it.  Now the story changes  when you ski soft (think- packed powder snow).  In eastern US we ski very little powder or packed powder snow, and it is even more unusual when the pp snow sticks around more than a few days.  I think we actually had 2 weeks last season of true packed powder skiing. I  digress...when I do ski true pp snow it only takes a turn or two to remember that bending the ski no longer takes much if any  for aft leveraging and I can make good quality turns standing in the middle of the ski, something I can't do on frozen granular, ice, injected etc.   By the way, where is the middle of a ski?  It's approximately under the AFD where the ball of the foot rests.

 

As for moving "foragonally"... it's a cute phrase but it's not an accurate description of what actually needs to happen or how to accomplish the intended goal.  Dorsiflexing or closing the ankles moves us towards the ski tips.  This movement takes place in the sagittal plane.   If we are skiing in a traverse and we also want to move down the mountain "foragonally"  then we need to add some sort of tipping a movement in the frontal or coronal plane.  It is a distinctly different movement with a different source for the effort.  If we focus on tipping movements from the ankle up while we are certain we have the ankle closed at turn initiation the result is what I think those in power are looking for when they ask for foragonal movement,   that is a "foragonal" movement of the COM down the mountain towards the inside of the next turn.  I lump telling folks to move "foragonally" in the same useless place I lump telling skiers to "get forward".   Without isolating and training the specific movements required to achieve the desired outcome,  the student usually ends up with something less than ideal.  It's a gripe I have with one of the trainers at my mountain.  It's obvious he thinks it's a cute phrase but I've yet to see him teach someone how to move "foragonally".     YM

post #210 of 259

The problem with over steering the end of the turn is that the skis are not traveling the direction they are pointing (and it's worse on hard snow) if that's what you are looking to do.    It's that spectrum thing again.  If you're really looking to slow down then oversteering to a hockey stop is a good thing.  I remember the phrase from the straight ski era in racing parlance, "round at the top and straight out".  Get the line in the gates you're looking for and then do what it takes to get the ski running straight again.  And that's a topic for another thread.  The idea still applies in the age of shaped skis but probably not to the same extent.  YM

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › "Oversteering:" is this a term or a movement pattern that instructors use today?