or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Something old. Somthing new?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Something old. Somthing new?

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 

Always hated the term 'strong inside half'. I found it vague, non-descriptive and confusing. So I never used it

 

Over the past couple of seasons I have been using the idea and the term 'active inside half' with a lot of success in both performance and cognitive areas with my students.

 

Just out of curiosity does anyone out there have any thoughts on the contrasts between these two terms?

 

fom

post #2 of 28

Active could imply any number of things, so can strong. No real benefit to either without a lot more details.

Inside half precedes the outside half through the turn. Still a bit murky but it starts to describe what both hemispheres should be doing relative to each other.

 

Keep the inside hip over the inside foot / inside foot under the inside hip is another way to produce a countered stance. This brings to mind the rule of parallels as it applies to the rotational world. Tips/feet/pelvis/shoulders parallel produces the ski into and out of counter rotated stances so many schools promote.

 

In the end it is mostly about rotational discipline and not allowing a shoulder / hip to drop aft and thus screw up the inside half's position relative to the inside ski.

post #3 of 28
I agree with jasp that "active" is as ambiguous as "strong". We know something is active or moving but that is about it. However, I believe these phrases and others like it are or can be used for referring to a specific set of movements within an overriding context as mutually understood by those who are speaking. If folks from that "other" program are speaking these words, it has a very specific meaning, inside foot tuck being one that jasp brought up. In this case, though, a "leading "inside half may be a more relative term than active or strong. Any ski movement could be too easily described as "active" or "strong" but not "leading". It may also mislead in conveying that the inside half is supposed to be more active or stronger than the outside half. If you would want to say it in a way that could also provide motivation towards correction, at least for a guy, then you could refer to its lack there of as the flaccid inside half. smile.gif
post #4 of 28

It serves to focus the attention on it. I think I prefer strong, as it implies muscle and effort.

 

What is it? After the pole plant, keep that hand strong, going forward, through the pole plant, together with the shoulder and the hip, to avoid rotation and banking, dropping the hand, hip or shoulder behind or low.

 

Semantically, Active seems to imply some special activity or relative movement, but that's not really the case, although you can argue counter-rotation/counteraction.... Strong means more like "maintain" and "effort" which is more like it.

 

cheers

post #5 of 28

I've never been a fan of the strong inside half slogan, I never use it and I don't see any difference with active inside half..it still is not clear at all what it means and can be interpreted a myriad of ways incorrectly.

 

I think its ok to use that language if you are teaching a bunch of other stuff and want to emphasize that all of that stuff is an active inside half..and perhaps refer to it within a lesson after you have described the meaning of it.  Fine.  But unfortunately slogans like that one have circulated around teaching and coaching circles for decades, and often have led to mis interpretation as the myths form when its passed down several iterations from person to person.

 

I guess others have said this already, and I concur

post #6 of 28
Wow! Can we leave Harb and his system out of one thread? Is that too much to ask?
I mentioned far more than tucking a foot, I first mentioned keeping the hip over the foot. As in rotating the pelvis on the head of the femur of the outside (stance) leg. Javelin turns feature such a move. I know many here hate the idea of rotary but inside half lead uses counter rotary elements to get and keep that inside half leading.
post #7 of 28

I don't like inside foot under hips, usually leads to loosing weight on the other one and/or no angles... what's this tucking of the foot? haven't heard that before, although this morning I was thinking of a "heel tuck" to describe something... I guess similar... but different...

 

I also am not a fan of the "passive" counter coming from shuffling the inside foot. That won't work in SL anyways - a strong "coiling" is more desirable.

 

I guess now you see what the "heel tuck" describes... ? Funny coincidence...

 

cheers,

raz

post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post
, I first mentioned keeping the hip over the foot.

Just to be clear,  I think you mean that you want the hip over the foot in the sagittal plane.  The hip is definitely not over the foot in the frontal plane if one has high edge angles and lots of angulation.   Just saying you want the hip over the foot is not enough.  It isn't clear to the uninitiated.  It only becomes clear when it is viewed in the proper context.  YM

post #9 of 28

There in lies the problem. All three planes of motion are involved and the sagittal plane tilts as the skier inclines. Projecting that inside hip and shoulder forward and up thus cannot be viewed as simply motion in one plane because the motion involves U / L separation, as well as lateral body shaping. For the neophytes the idea may be a bit confusing if we include all of that but the movement itself isn't all that confusing. Neophytes may not grasp the planes of motion stuff without some demonstrating though and I have found javelins, to ILS, and eventually to pivot slips makes the inside half lead idea easier to grasp.

post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman View Post
 

Always hated the term 'strong inside half'. I found it vague, non-descriptive and confusing.

 

 

 

 

I agree.   The first time I heard that term I wasn't sure what was being referred to as strong.   Eventually I caught on but for me the term really does little to explain what the skier needs to be doing.  Shorten the inside leg,  keep the inside foot pulled back,  pinch the side, keep the shoulders level with the slope are all descriptive terms which without further edification tell the skier what to do.   "Strong inside half"   tells me nothing  without further explanation.  YM

post #11 of 28
Yogaman, rather than 'feel the pinch' of the outside, I've had better results changing the focus to 'feel the stretch' of the inside.
post #12 of 28
Suffice to say that there are a lot of movements, some micro some macro, going on in order to have a properly activated "inside half" all of which contributes to good outside "stacking". Labeling such things will always fail to convey what is really happening, which is one reason I used quotes in this post wink.gif

And yes obviously there is rotation.

zenny
post #13 of 28

... one single point of view or one single label is never enough... 

 

i still like "strong" though - as opposed to "weak" and "forgotten" which is what the issue is...

post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune View Post
Labeling such things will always fail to convey what is really happening, which is one reason I used quotes in this post wink.gif


 

Absolutely,       "You cannot take a bath in the word water"      YM

post #15 of 28
Personally, I rarely if ever use little catchphrases like "strong inside half" for that reason, rather I just try and elicit the movements I want to see. I will say the the word "strong" conjures up images like scissoring and hip dumping as these are both products of a more "forced" or "contrived" nature. Strong sort of overlooks some of the subtlety involved....in my mind at least.

zenny
post #16 of 28

yeah... you can't have a "strong outside leg" without a "strong inside half"...?

post #17 of 28

if you really think about it....its a strong OUTSIDE half we strive for.  FOM is right in a sense, we develop a strong outside half with an active inside half.

post #18 of 28
Before the inside half can do anything, it has to be erected to match the excitement of the outside half. To do that, the inside half must become intrigued with the outside half putting its best foot forward. Once an interested inside half meets a hot and bothered outside half, soon you have a bunch of little inside and outside halves skiing behind you and following you around the mountain. to avoid this from transpireing, always wear your safety helmet.
post #19 of 28

Time and Place.

At one point in time during my development as a skier, after spending considerable attention on the outside leg, I found the expression "strong inside half" a good reminder not to ignore the inside ski, but make sure it was on-board and carving along with the outside ski. 

post #20 of 28

When I first heard "strong inside half" those saying it to me assumed those three words conveyed what it meant.  Not so.  I had no clue; "strong" I understood, so I assumed the inside half of the body should not collapse.  Not exactly what the phrase is meant to say, although not collapsing is fine.

 

Once someone knows the subtleties of skiing with a "strong inside half" and has experienced them, then the phrase conjures up all the little parts of this set of related movements.   

There are lots of phrases like this in skiing; it's hard to construct a short phrase that tells it all because skiing is complicated and it's so easy to get things wrong.  

 

Being shown, and getting feedback as you try to mimic what your mentor is showing you, is about the only way to gain real knowledge of what these catch phrases mean.  Maybe video with graphics over the stills would help.  But who has time to do that?

post #21 of 28
It's the "4 S's"...separation, separation, separation, and separation :-)

zenny
post #22 of 28
I think some of this csn be traced back to the past. That one footed balancing we once promoted allowed thr inside ski and the inside leg to tag along in the air, or barely skimming on the snow. Two footed stances were normally only found in wedge and wedge Christie turns. Then a relatively passive inside leg became more popular as racers adopted a more two footed stance and that eventually morphed into a more active and more involved inside half. Especially outside the racing world.
To precipitate that change we developed drills like Barnes' bar stool drill, or Schancey's pole pivot drill. I use the crest of a bump and no ski poles to develop good rotational discipline in both hemispheres. If you twist the shoulders, or move your hands / arms, or fall off the crest, there is room for refining those rotary moves. All so that we can have the inside half lead through the turn.
post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

I think some of this csn be traced back to the past. That one footed balancing we once promoted allowed thr inside ski and the inside leg to tag along in the air, or barely skimming on the snow. Two footed stances were normally only found in wedge and wedge Christie turns. Then a relatively passive inside leg became more popular as racers adopted a more two footed stance and that eventually morphed into a more active and more involved inside half. Especially outside the racing world.
To precipitate that change we developed drills like Barnes' bar stool drill, or Schancey's pole pivot drill. I use the crest of a bump and no ski poles to develop good rotational discipline in both hemispheres. If you twist the shoulders, or move your hands / arms, or fall off the crest, there is room for refining those rotary moves. All so that we can have the inside half lead through the turn.

 

Schancey's pole pivot drill?  Please say more.  I've never heard of this one.

post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

I think some of this csn be traced back to the past. That one footed balancing we once promoted allowed thr inside ski and the inside leg to tag along in the air, or barely skimming on the snow. Two footed stances were normally only found in wedge and wedge Christie turns. Then a relatively passive inside leg became more popular as racers adopted a more two footed stance and that eventually morphed into a more active and more involved inside half. Especially outside the racing world.

To precipitate that change we developed drills like Barnes' bar stool drill, or Schancey's pole pivot drill. I use the crest of a bump and no ski poles to develop good rotational discipline in both hemispheres. If you twist the shoulders, or move your hands / arms, or fall off the crest, there is room for refining those rotary moves. All so that we can have the inside half lead through the turn.

Schancey's pole pivot drill?  Please say more.  I've never heard of this one.

Lay a pole on the snow 90 degrees to the direction you are facing, then stand on it in boots only with the pole at the front of your heel to the middle of your arch in the pocket under the middle of your boot. Then you can pivot like on the bar stools because the pole anchors the fore/aft movement so you can turn one leg against the other.
post #25 of 28

Oh.  I know that one, but not by any particular name.  Thanks.

post #26 of 28
We're adding a room between our house and our garage (wheeeeeee=no more shoveling the path between) and in the process, converting from a forced air furnace to in-floor heating with a boiler. So all the venting plumbing PVC piping is getting cut up into three-foot lengths that I'm going to drill a hole in one end for a wire so the piping can be hung from trees around the resort. Now I'll have access to great pivot teaching devices!!
post #27 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

Time and Place.

 

Ghost, quantum gravity theory is definitely taking things too far. :)

post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman View Post
 

Always hated the term 'strong inside half'. I found it vague, non-descriptive and confusing. So I never used it

 

Over the past couple of seasons I have been using the idea and the term 'active inside half' with a lot of success in both performance and cognitive areas with my students.

 

Just out of curiosity does anyone out there have any thoughts on the contrasts between these two terms?

 

fom

 What may be vague and confusing to some may bring enlightenment and clarity to others.  Being able to say things many different ways is the sign of a good teacher.  That's one of the reasons I participate in this forum.  "Strong inside half" doesn't ring many bells for me either but for the person who coined the term it obviously did.

 

"Active Inside" is good.  I also like "Inside participation" because I find many lower end skiers are actually blocking the outside just by the inside being benign. 

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 › Something old. Somthing new?