or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Skills classifications and overlap between them
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Skills classifications and overlap between them - Page 2

post #31 of 58
Thread Starter 
Yes mark a graphic helps explain the theory but does little to translate that theory into real world applications. I posted just such a graphic years ago to explain the difference between discrete and overlapping skill classifications.


Edited by justanotherskipro - 8/30/15 at 9:51am
post #32 of 58
Thread Starter 
The 96 manual has a similar graphic with different size circles and captions identifying different skiing activities. But no photos of real world examples corresponding to those graphics.
Twenty years and a whole lot of pictures later we may be able to piece together some real world examples.
post #33 of 58
Well no movement happens in true isolation or has effects in only one plane....it's why I mentioned the feet...if I tip/untip them I turn them (and also affect them sagitally) and vice versa..

But there are other examples

zenny
post #34 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

The 96 manual has a similar graphic with different size circles and captions identifying different skiing activities. But no photos of real world examples corresponding to those graphics.
Twenty years and a whole lot of pictures later we may be able to piece together some real world examples.

Just needs a time animation is all.
post #35 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post


Let's go one step further.  You tip the ski to a high edge angle (but not high enough to ensure arc-2-arc "pure carving", and apply weight forward balance to dig that front tip in (RLM oversteer).   Applying that into- the-snow force at the tip involves a rotary torque at the boot, and involves the same muscular effort that would be needed to apply a rotary movement at the boot with skis flat to the snow, except now the force turning the skis is applied by the snow and is many times more than what the muscular effort would achieve.

Good points ghost. Oversteering does require mastery of edging as a skill in addition to fore aft balance manipulation as too much edging will likely result in railing rather then steering.

And further there is a rotary skill component as well since the femurs actually do rotate in the hip socket while doing this passively and need to at the very least by relaxed to allow them to turn or perhaps even requiring slight muscle rotary to keep the femurs from blocking the self steering results from the skis.

Pressure control aspect is more subtle here but my view is that if you are using some sense of touch to feel pressure on the front of the ski and the rear of the ski and perceive how to adjust your balance for aft and your tipping; so that the pressure between the front and the rear causes the ski to oversteer the way you want it to, then that is also pressure control skill development in its own way.

Suffice it to say that nearly all ski technique is probably some blending of all four of the motor skills.

I do also think there is perhaps two different meanings for the skills and its not 100% clear to me which is the intended use of PSIA/USSA. One is four planes or dimensions related to actual bio mechanical motor skills. The other is four planes or dimensions related to what the skis do on the snow.

So for example, if you are talking about "rotary" are you talking about whether the ski pivots or steers on the snow through any means, or are you talking about whether the skier is actually employing rotational bio mechanical movements such as twisting the legs, twisting the torso, counter rotating; where the outcome may or may not involve the ski actually pivoting or steering on the snow? There is conflation in this way too.

In my view, the outcomes do not always match the motor skills used. Technique is the application of motor skills, sometimes blending simultaneously and sometimes sequentially, in such a way that various outcomes are produced. The outcomes can also be a blending.

So if you want to say that all outcomes can be grouped under headings of rotational, edging, balance and pressure; or some combination, then you can determine what techniques will produce those outcomes. Techniques are applications of bio mechanical movements, which if you want you can group into four planes or dimensions also, I have to do more thinking about whether those four cover everything; but those bio mechanical movements can be combined in myriad of ways, and in concert with physics and gravity and ski/snow reaction produce the outcomes.

The four bio mechanical skills often mentioned should almost never be directly correlated to four outcome dimensions, because that ignores the physics of what the ski can do to contribute. Almost every desirable outcome in skiing should be thought of as the result of much more complicated combinations of bio mechanical movements and ski physics combined. How does one then figure out how to get the desired outcome by blending the bio mechanical movements?

Technique!
post #36 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post


Good points ghost. Oversteering does require mastery of edging as a skill in addition to fore aft balance manipulation as too much edging will likely result in railing rather then steering.

And further there is a rotary skill component as well since the femurs actually do rotate in the hip socket while doing this passively and need to at the very least by relaxed to allow them to turn or perhaps even requiring slight muscle rotary to keep the femurs from blocking the self steering results from the skis.

Pressure control aspect is more subtle here but my view is that if you are using some sense of touch to feel pressure on the front of the ski and the rear of the ski and perceive how to adjust your balance for aft and your tipping; so that the pressure between the front and the rear causes the ski to oversteer the way you want it to, then that is also pressure control skill development in its own way.

Suffice it to say that nearly all ski technique is probably some blending of all four of the motor skills.

I do also think there is perhaps two different meanings for the skills and its not 100% clear to me which is the intended use of PSIA/USSA. One is four planes or dimensions related to actual bio mechanical motor skills. The other is four planes or dimensions related to what the skis do on the snow.

So for example, if you are talking about "rotary" are you talking about whether the ski pivots or steers on the snow through any means, or are you talking about whether the skier is actually employing rotational bio mechanical movements such as twisting the legs, twisting the torso, counter rotating; where the outcome may or may not involve the ski actually pivoting or steering on the snow? There is conflation in this way too.

In my view, the outcomes do not always match the motor skills used. Technique is the application of motor skills, sometimes blending simultaneously and sometimes sequentially, in such a way that various outcomes are produced. The outcomes can also be a blending.

So if you want to say that all outcomes can be grouped under headings of rotational, edging, balance and pressure; or some combination, then you can determine what techniques will produce those outcomes. Techniques are applications of bio mechanical movements, which if you want you can group into four planes or dimensions also, I have to do more thinking about whether those four cover everything; but those bio mechanical movements can be combined in myriad of ways, and in concert with physics and gravity and ski/snow reaction produce the outcomes.

The four bio mechanical skills often mentioned should almost never be directly correlated to four outcome dimensions, because that ignores the physics of what the ski can do to contribute. Almost every desirable outcome in skiing should be thought of as the result of much more complicated combinations of bio mechanical movements and ski physics combined. How does one then figure out how to get the desired outcome by blending the bio mechanical movements?

Technique!

 

Nicely put. I would think and agree that the only outcomes of both technique and skill that really matter at all are the ones that are conveyed directly through the ski to the snow surface and ultimately resulting in the direction, speed and control we seek.

 

I will say that Ghost's description of oversteering sounds like more work and less efficiency: added effort of rotary boot torque resulting in a controlled disengagement. Maybe good for skiing in terrain too difficult to let the ski carry the loin's share of the work. Modern sidecuts allow for tipping and pressure alone to steer the ski allowing the leg to maintain alignment with the ski from the top of the femur down (or from the foot to the top of the femur for the bottom-up school of thinkers). This femur socket rotation, as BTS points out. is a "passive" move requiring no effort.

 

I agree that the ability for masterful control of infinite blends of skid and carve can be an aesthetically pleasurable thing to watch and offer a "heightened" sense of control to the skillfully dedicated. However, the ability to create the solid platform a carving ski can provide allows for attention to be taken away from such nuances of ski disengagement and re-applied to more outwardly important things such as direction of line from tipping, absorption from flexion, pressure from extension and leaving rotary to a higher level of competency with the larger joints such as the hips and waist. Of course there will always be the need for fine tuned (small) movements/adjustments in the ankle and knee to aid ongoing alignment.

post #37 of 58

Absolutely Rich666,

Pure arc-2-arc carving is more efficient, and preferable to over-steering/understeering to adjust steering angle in a smeared turn. 

Still even in pure carving, there is occasion to vary fore-aft weight distribution and if the ski is tipped on edge, and having more down force on the front of the ski than at the back of the ski (or vise-versa), by the laws of physics (force times distance = torque) you will have a net torque at the boot-ski interface. 


Edited by Ghost - 8/30/15 at 5:20pm
post #38 of 58
Thread Starter 
So pressuring the tips doesn't move the pivot towards the tips rather than underfoot? Interesting...
post #39 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 

Modern sidecuts allow for tipping and pressure alone to steer the ski allowing the leg to maintain alignment with the ski from the top of the femur down (or from the foot to the top of the femur for the bottom-up school of thinkers). This femur socket rotation, as BTS points out. is a "passive" move requiring no effort.

 

Just to clarify what I said earlier...  Many on this forum have referred to this as "passive" rotary.  So I used  bit of that language.  "Passive" in so much that the leg is not turning the ski...  The ski's rotary is bio mechanically passive, but the bio mechanical rotary aspect is normally not absent or effortless.

 

Rotary skills include counter development.  Whether you are talking bout twisting the femurs to create it, or use counter-rotation of the pelvis to accomplish it, its not completely passive.  And it could be a little of both.

 

There is a certain amount of bio mechanical motor skill used even to just stay out of the way and work in concert with the ski's self steering effects, to create upper/lower separation as it proceeds.  Skill development in this area does not mean more more more.  It means refinement.

post #40 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntoski683 View Post

Just to clarify what I said earlier...  Many on this forum have referred to this as "passive" rotary.  So I used  bit of that language.  "Passive" in so much that the leg is not turning the ski...  The ski's rotary is bio mechanically passive, but the bio mechanical rotary aspect is normally not absent or effortless.

Rotary skills include counter development.  Whether you are talking bout twisting the femurs to create it, or use counter-rotation of the pelvis to accomplish it, its not completely passive.  And it could be a little of both.

There is a certain amount of bio mechanical motor skill used even to just stay out of the way and work in concert with the ski's self steering effects, to create upper/lower separation as it proceeds.  Skill development in this area does not mean more more more.  It means refinement.
OK, I appreciate the effort at clarification. So, let's call it a passive-aggressive move. smile.gif
After reading this post and thinking more I believe it is the muscel (maybe the tensor fascias?) that allows for freedom of movement at the femur socket that is the muscel that will contract and hold the completion of rotation through the remainder of the turn.
post #41 of 58
Thread Starter 
Movements of the body creating a change in how the ski interact with the snow are how movements get classified in the first place. This may seem straight forward enough but when a movement appears in more than one classification the confusion starts. Perhaps the intent of a movement (or maneuver) needs to be discussed along with that movement. Efficacy then can be evaluated as long as the situational variables are within a reasonably similar range. When those situational variables are outside that range the net effect of our movement upon what the skis will do can change.
So I am going to suggest the seeking of any universal theory is a clue to understanding a skier's developmental stage. Many of the generation before mine talked about this as absolute thinking in a chaotic and highly variable environment. Right before telling me adaptability and versatility outweighs perfect form. It is similar in concept to weather predictions. We can make general predictions but not really any exact ones. Too many variables.
In any case after enough time we gain enough experience to make decisions that are most likely to work. But it is when we turn those into absolutes and offer them as best practices in all situations that they break down. A wider set of skills and the ability to apply those wider skill sets in various combinations with other skills means losing the rigid boundaries between those classifications.

When we automatize most of the movement combinations we are free to simply go where we want to go. I would offer the idea of walking and how not many of us focus on the movements as much as focus on our destination. Nor do we make a lot of subjective judgments about how others walk. So why do we do so in skiing? Is there an inherent need for all of us to ski the same? Again the variables involved suggest that is hardly possible. But that doesn't seem to matter much and many of the arguments over technique and tactics here and elsewhere come down to marketing. FAB's and compare and contrast presentations meant to get folks to buy that brand. Selling the product of skiing a certain way if you will. I hope someday the idea ofexclusion of all but one organizational set of ideals will give way to the reality that multiple pathways to enlightenment exist and if we arrive at the same place it is impossible to say one way is best for everyone.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 8/31/15 at 11:19am
post #42 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

 I would offer the idea of walking and how not many of us focus on the movements as much as focus on our destination. Nor do we make a lot of subjective judgments about how others walk. 

  

 :eek 

 

I assume by "us" and "we" you mean ski instructors, coaches of ski athletes, or technical enthusiasts since you posted in this forum.  That doesn't sound like the ski instructors that I respect.

 

The first two steps of other pedestrians are to analyze gait and alignment issues.  Anteversion?  Tibial varum?  Trendelenberg gait from dead glute meds that will block a pedestrian from balancing over a ski?  Are their hips squeezed into a knot to avoid rotation?  Shoes that lock the ankles?  Better off snowboarding due to alignment?  Aren't you analyzing an entire storeful of walkers each time you go to the grocery store?  After the first two steps, isn't there a part of your mind which predicts each step, compares the prediction to the outcome, and points out predictive shortcomings to your conscious mind?  Don't you recognize your coworkers by the rhythm of their gait behind you or its appearance when inside your field of view?

 

Aren't you fully kinaesthetically aware of every step you yourself personally take?  Are you not adjusting your balance and gait each step in response to the last?  

 

If you operate your skiing machine (body) open loop for thousands of hours without scrutinizing performance, how can you expect the most refined of performance when you encounter snow.  :confused 

post #43 of 58
Jasp it's not at all clear to me how you got from asking us our opinion about not so straightforward matching between motor skills and ski outcomes....to your current rant about everyone skiing the same way. I haven't heard anyone suggest that on this thread and seems a distraction from your original post.

Do you feel that using "technique" detracts from being able to handle a wide variety of situations with applicable DIRT? The use of technique does not preclude use of a large toolbox of techniques. What technique does is give you a way to coordinate and synchronize rather complicated combinations of bio mechanical movements in response to the changing dynamic conditions of the slope, surface condition and external forces in various ways that makes sense for skiing and basically addresses the very issue you are asking about.

Mastery of the motor skills provides a lot of DIRT for various conditions and situations as fine tune adjusters while technique gets you into the ballpark. I do feel it's a real shame that PSIA is so deficient in formalizing technique in the latest materials. You seem to be searching in quest for answers about how to codify the combinations of four skills that accomplish various things. The PSIA mindset seems to be rather anti-technique, which seems to be your POV also, please correct me if I'm wrong. As such, you can tell people to go blend the four skills to their hearts content all night long but the truth is we do have to teach them more specific techniques which are combinations of the 4 motor skills. I would be quite surprised if you are not also teaching technique of your own, technique which is not spelled out in the current materials, but nonetheless technique you have figured out over the years works to accomplish skiing successfully. It provides a way identify certain combinations of the motor skills in sequence and/or blended together in certain ways.....and yet still plenty of room for DIRT to provide nuance. You are only limited if your toolbox of technique is also limited. But using technique is an enabler, not a disabler. As there are various good forms of technique with subtle or not so subtle variations, there are also ample forms of poor technique. We see it everyday we get someone new to teach. When skiers attempt to ski without technique taught they will form their own intuitive technique, which is more often then not......and I mean WAY more often then not......self formed as poor technique.

The answer to your inquiry about matching motor skills to ski outcomes when they don't seem to match intuitively is all provided by good technique. I leave it to you to decide which techniques you want to learn or ignore. There is something to be said for a large diverse toolbox of techniques, compounded by DIRT variability. However the flip side is that certain movement sequences and combinations are very diametrically opposite of other constructive sequences, and that is when neural pathways formed on certain techniques can make other techniques very difficult to learn properly, groove into muscle memory and be able to go back and forth on demand. It's an admirable goal but the reality is most people will struggle with that. Like trying to be a switch hitter. There is tremendous wisdom in embracing a set of techniques that are complimentary without conflicting and use DIRT to provide variability.
post #44 of 58
Thread Starter 
The first sentence of that paragraph gives all of that context SE. At some point I doubt you focus on gait and such, you just walk to a destination.
So do I watch folks in the grocery store looking for knockkneed, bowlegged, or pelvic tilt/limited RoM in a hip. I may notice that but my focus is more on getting the items I need and getting home as soon as possible.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 8/31/15 at 5:03pm
post #45 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post
But that doesn't seem to matter much and many of the arguments over technique and tactics here and elsewhere come down to marketing. FAB's and compare and contrast presentations meant to get folks to buy that brand. Selling the product of skiing a certain way if you will. I hope someday the idea ofexclusion of all but one organizational set of ideals will give way to the reality that multiple pathways to enlightenment exist and if we arrive at the same place it is impossible to say one way is best for everyone.

 

This reminds me of back in the day when I used to sell skis. Especially in the first few seasons when shaped skis were the new thing. I wasn't so much selling the ski as much as I was selling the new techniques and creatively proposed experience that would come with them. I would often back that up with the offer to meet on the hill for a few runs their first day on them and help with orientation. It was amazing how quickly some learned to lay it over. It was so easy and fun to sell a person their first pair of carving skis. Like selling crack to a baby. :) Just joking ... babies don't have money.

post #46 of 58

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Rotary to change fore aft stance, flex and extend to modify edge angles, etc.

Might take some issues with that. Flex/extend does not modify edge angles unless you're in a static frame of reference where you let your moving body drag the skis on edge - big fail as a racer, since you loose the edges while waiting (no carving at the top). Use feet/ankles to tip the skis on edge, flex/extend just maintain and allow hips/skis separation through the arc.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Flex and extend moves normally are assigned to the pressure management classification but here we see retraction bringing the feet back underneath the body and the skis getting flatter to the snow. Then as the legs extend the skiers stance once again becomes inclined and edge angle increase. Classic retraction transitions.
Additionally the counter rotated stances power the redirecting of the skis and all of that is normally classified as rotary but as we can see it also produces a fore / aft stance and balance adjustment.
Lastly in the first frame the edge angles are such that fore / aft adjustment like we would normally use to create tip pressure might break loose the tails where a leg steering move might add tip pressure without the excessive levering.

I don't think retraction brings the feet back, on the contrary. You must pressure shins strongly/close ankles/pull boots back and tip strongly to counter the effects of the retraction or the next turn is bye bye...!!!

 

I don't see any redirection here, honestly - just nice SL arcs - the skis turn as much above the fall line as they do under. A little too much inclination in the middle for my taste, but ok - helps with the offset gates there.

.

The countered stance he maintains through the transition is awesome, helped with the great blocking plant there - it allows him the tight carve in spite of little angulation - it doesn't power a redirection, but the carving of the top of the turn! Textbook awesomeness.

 

cheers


Edited by razie - 9/1/15 at 4:28am
post #47 of 58
Thread Starter 
Razie
Reaching slalom turns use a lot of leg length change sort of like how a spider reaches out a leg laterally as they walk. The net effect of that lateral leg extension (reaching) is tipping.
As far as the redirect frame seven features neither ski on the snow and yet frame 8 shows the skis changed direction. The pelvis also turned and is now facing the camera. Since the skis are mostly hidden (I only see the outside forebody) it is hard to say much but the relative position of the skier and especially the position of the inside leg suggests little if any contact with the snow. So I doubt carving is how that redirect occurred. The more likely cause would be the uncoiling of the pelvis and lower body. A rotary move.
post #48 of 58
Thread Starter 

janyk-bc-2006-sl-1.jpg

post #49 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post

Absolutely Rich666,
Pure arc-2-arc carving is more efficient, and preferable to over-steering/understeering to adjust steering angle in a smeared turn. 
Still even in pure carving, there is occasion to vary fore-aft weight distribution and if the ski is tipped on edge, and having more down force on the front of the ski than at the back of the ski (or vise-versa), by the laws of physics (force times distance = torque) you will have a net torque at the boot-ski interface. 

Myopic.
post #50 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Razie
Reaching slalom turns use a lot of leg length change sort of like how a spider reaches out a leg laterally as they walk. The net effect of that lateral leg extension (reaching) is tipping.
.
I don't see it quite that way. For sure there is lots of flexing and extending in SL well, everywhere, but...

IF I dont come off a very flexed transition, I can extend all I want or as litke as I can with no edging effect.

IF I cone off a very flexed transition and just rely on extension aka hips moving down the hill for edging, I will loose the edges. I NEED to roll my ankles and keep the edge engaged and the extension merely allows that to happen as the hips continua moving down the hill.

I guess this would be another caus-effect discussion though.

As to uncoiling - as long as the skis ate on edge and not flat, it will generally help them set the tips rather than pivot, I think. Redirection generally accompanies a tall transition.... Generally... Of course there at exceptions. If I don't see a serious redirection I usually diregard it and focus on getting the edges to grab, which is more critical in SL as you d ok nt have much time and much fuzzie-woozie can happen at the top of a high-energy WC turn anyways

Cheers

edit/

so what i'm saying is that tipping is separate from extending and hips moving down the hill. they all happen at the same time so you could I guess say that the net effect could be putting the skis on edge... but tipping is not a result of extending and hips movements, but a separate thing we need to do.
Edited by razie - 9/1/15 at 7:56am
post #51 of 58
Thread Starter 
Razzie, extend the legs laterally verses vertically and the feet move away from the body and the tibias tilt. Since the boots and skis are attached they too tilt (tip). As far as edge purchase and platforms those occur with the application of pressure. Which requires contact. No contact,no edge purchase. The redirect thus cannot be from edge and pressure. At the ultratalented level like we see in that montage he lights down on the snow perfectly set up to scarve the rest of the turn.
In the second montage aft stances are prevelent and so tip oressure is unlikely what is turning the skis.
post #52 of 58
Had some time while waiting at the bone crushers to figure out why I had a reaction to this and to think of the words to describe what happens at the top of the turn.

Extension is the enemy of tipping, if you think about it.

You....or I... are trying to hinge the skis around their edges with tipping but in extension, the resultant force is applied in the middle of the ski and thus tries to flatten it. It's like fighting myself. This is why the tipping from the ankles must be very forceful in a flexed transition to counteract any flattening tendencies from extension.

So tipping creates a torque aroung the edge to tip the ski on edge while extension tries to cancel that.

Hmm.
Edited by razie - 9/1/15 at 8:58am
post #53 of 58

ok - finally sitting down at a decent keyboard.

 

so from here:

 

 

if I extend I just popup like a meerkat.

 

if i try to extend the legs to the side by rotating the femurs in the hips, that movement will actually try to both lift my skis from the snow and flatten them and doesn't help with the edge engagement and result in a skid/pivot/steer/redirect whatever and delay edge engagement.

 

the only thing that I can do to engage my edges early at the top of the turn is to tip the around the edges, from the boot. this torque (maybe with teh help of some femur rotation along its long axis) will both dig the edges in, tip the skis and counter all other forces (like other femur rotation and extension) that try to lift my skis and flatten them. the "extension" is passive, just to allow the hips to move down and forward while the skis ride the edges and come around...

 

...reminder that I am trying... from there to get to here, 

 

 

by 1) allowing the hips to travel sideways, down and forward and 2) edge the skis so they ride the arc and come around, firmly engaged by the apex. Upper body - lower body separation at it's finest. Having them color-coded helps :cool

 

...of course those other things happen at the same time, to keep this accordeon playing, but all these are separate things we do - not all have 100% good effects

 

cheers

 

edit/ you can see why when you start pushing, the tipping stops... so the extension better be passive and pushing/pressure as late as possible:

 


Edited by razie - 9/1/15 at 10:54am
post #54 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

 extend the legs laterally verses vertically and the feet move away from the body and the tibias tilt. Since the boots and skis are attached they too tilt (tip). 

 

This is an example of technique, right or wrong  ^^^^^^

 

however....

 

Extending the legs does not create inclination effectively.   You really need to tip from the feet with relaxed legs, or you can allow the hips to drop inside, which can cause the skis to tip, even with totally dead feet.

 

Extending limits your options for tipping.  The movement reduces and eventually eliminates lateral range of motion in the legs.  The more your leg is relaxed and bent, the more you can tip from the feet, move the knee, mobilize the femur in the hip socket; to create tipping of the ski(s).  More the leg is straight, this RoM is reduced, thus reducing the amount of tipping you can actually create with your feet and femurs.  If your leg is completely straight, then you will be severely constrained in terms of bio-mechanically tipping the skis.  At that point the only real way to tip the skis is to drop the hip inside, thus inclinating the entire leg and tipping the ski.

 

Extension does not create tipping..it constrains it.  Much more effective tipping happens with bent and relaxed legs, not legs which are extending.

 

you can call that "technique" too.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post

Extension is the enemy of tipping, if you think about it.

 

yes.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by razie View Post
 

 

 

edit/ you can see why when you start pushing, the tipping stops... so the extension better be passive and pushing/pressure as late as possible:

 

 

This too is a very important consideration...this is more related to "skill" then "technique".  Basically the bio-mechanical muscular interactions involved in extension are somewhat bio-mechanically diametrically opposite from the muscular engagements needed to tip the skis.  You tip your skis bio mechanically by relaxing the leg, allowing it to bend or at least be bent..but definitely relaxed, and engage movements which abduct the inside leg at the least and possibly adduct your outside leg also.  These movements are not harmonious with extension.  So just in terms of the skill of tipping the skis, extension is a deal killer.  

post #55 of 58
Thread Starter 
Razie, the float phase does not include edge engagement. You're inserting an erroneous outcome into that airborne phase. Tipping without edge engagement is the key here. Step away from your theories for a moment and you will see the vaulted nature of that montage. You will also see the aft stance in the second montage. Neither are possible ways to turn according to you yet they still happened. That should give you pause to ponder the possiblity.
post #56 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

Razie, the float phase does not include edge engagement. You're inserting an erroneous outcome into that airborne phase. Tipping without edge engagement is the key here. Step away from your theories for a moment and you will see the vaulted nature of that montage. You will also see the aft stance in the second montage. Neither are possible ways to turn according to you yet they still happened. That should give you pause to ponder the possiblity.

 

For sure we are not looking for serious edge engagement while tipping the skis on edge, initially - that would require pressure and we don't want that too early - you are right. And yes, all energetic transitions include some floating - even that one of mine above, I dare say.

 

I don't know that being back excludes carving? in that photo from the side you reference, the gates are not offset, so no serious coiling occurred anyways and i see carving all the way. it's slower to engage and if the gates were offset he'll end up skidding, but works fine.

 

Also floating - both me and the skier in the photo tries to keep the new outside ski in contact - otherwise it's easy to get it skidding and again delay edge engagement - I would't say we can't turn :rolleyes, it's just more biomechanics at play. Past skis flat, everyone puts the new outside ski on edge and on snow asap, for this reason.

 

I'm not doubting redirection or something, in gates it certainly is needed in direct proportion to the lack of skill, but pointing out that if you don't tip and rely just on extension, then edge engagement is delayed and pivoting/redirection is perhaps the only option.

 

cheers

post #57 of 58
Thread Starter 
WC skiers break a lot of so called rules. Not because they lack talent as much as they are on the ragged edge and their instincts tell them what movements to use. Michela's white pass recovery in Sochi is just one example. But neither of the examples I posted are recoveries just examples of how overlap occurs.
You may wish to label the leg extension as passive but it is a willful move executed well. Same can be said for the plantar flexing from an aft stance in the second montage.
.
post #58 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

WC skiers break a lot of so called rules. Not because they lack talent as much as they are on the ragged edge and their instincts tell them what movements to use. 


Thumbs Up

 

yep. totally. not to mention other extreme skiing like steeps, heli drops etc - whenever we push the limits of our ability, skiing gets interesting ! one needs to make sure one has a good functional use of the fundamentals and then just roll with it !

 

cheers

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 › Skills classifications and overlap between them