or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › "Absorbing the virtual bump" for racers & recreational groomer skiers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

"Absorbing the virtual bump" for racers & recreational groomer skiers - Page 2

post #31 of 50

 

I promise anyone that that is the best cup of coffee they'll ever have. 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LiquidFeet View Post
 

 

Well, yes, but no one is arguing yet.  Think that will happen in this thread?

Not until somebody pisses me off.

 

Actually I’d rather suggest that the bolded statement could be reasons not to jump to conclusions and to make or take things personal. I bet 99% of the ideas, philosophies and concepts shared here are constructs assembled from components not original to any post's author. Yet we become territorial and temperamental with our assertions as if this is not the case. While intellectually based conflict is typically a product of change and enlightenment, once the language crosses over the tipping point from technical assertion to a perceived personal offense or disrespect, this plight becomes lost to the "virtual" black hole of the internet. Not saying that I haven't rendered a thread or two or at least some of my own posts to this fate. It is often said that reading to reply rather than to understand is probably the biggest problem. If someone finds themselves responding with a high level of disagreement punctuated by an aggressive tone to a post they only read only once, this may be the case as well as, perhaps, for those who do not proof what they write as if this is not technical writing. In some cases, careless or "fundamentally unique" sentence structure results in a wayward interpretation of unintended emphasis that can lead things astray. A person’s ski knowledge is only as good as their ability to communicate it. I feel I have learned most from those here with a healthy balance of both.

post #32 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post


When I finally figured this out, it made all the stuff I was trying to remember at once a lot easier.

Like pulling your skis back at the start of the turn. If you are backpedaling like this it just happens, you don't have to think about it.
post #33 of 50
Thanks to Mr.Barns. It is a primary movement for me. A movement skill useful in uneven terrain and soft snow conditions. Nothing like starting out on the right foot. :-) Try it you'll like it. The end results will be fast & somooth.
post #34 of 50

There was a mention of the turn forces being greater in phase 3 of the turn.  Isn't the virtual bump the primary reason for this?

post #35 of 50

The virtual bump affects forces in the vertical direction.   When you go around a curve skiing down a slope, gravity is helping you turn at the top so your ski needs to push with less force to make your turn, and gravity is resisting that turn at the bottom so your skis have to push you harder into the turn to overcome gravity and make you turn.  Two different things, but as they both occur, it does add some complexity.

post #36 of 50
A good example of early edge engagement from flexing in transition. Bases are facing uphill.
post #37 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xela View Post
 

There was a mention of the turn forces being greater in phase 3 of the turn.  Isn't the virtual bump the primary reason for this?

 

There were two or three other factors mentioned in that post that provide compression force that are far more discussed because I believe they are more relevant to compression build up than the "virtual bump".

 

1. Phase 3 is where we purposely time dropping our full weight on the ski to carve across the fall line.

 

2. Phase 3 is where the up force from centrifugal force has built to max.

 

3. The end of phase 3 is where our upper body (staying low) is colliding with the lower body squeezing itself under the CoM as a result from retraction transitions. 

 

So, in effect, one retraction move addresses all 4 forces. How's that for killing a flock with one rock?

post #38 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by slider View Post

A good example of early edge engagement from flexing in transition. Bases are facing uphill.

 

Very nice example of an upside down turn. So who's the skier?

post #39 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 

 The "virtual bump" concept is reliant on turning into a slope change and a concept too dynamic to be represented by a two dimensional staircase example. It is a good point regarding what someone may be fully acclimated to and therefore less sensitive. On top of that, there is a wide range of scenarios regarding variables including over all slope angle, speed, turn size and turn shape. Then, add the other two forms of compression at the same spot in the turn (upper/lower body collision and phase 3 max turn forces) and there really are too many variables that, along with all of the communication variables, renders the idea of discussion that actually results in any sort of unified understanding equal to that of most technical threads.

Gobbly-gook!  Total bloviation!

 

Collision of your upper and lower body??? Really?  i SUBMIT YOUR UPPER AND LOWER BODY HAVE SEPARATION, CERTAINLY NOT COLLISION!

 

 BUT YOUR COM AND YOUR SKIS CROSS PATHS....THEY DON'T COLLIDE!  

 

 

 

Virtual bump is a widely understood concept. And it is not reliant on actually turning into a slope change....it is uh uh.......... wait for it ........................VIRTUAL!!!!!  

 

GOOD LORD....ATTEMPT TO SPEAK ENGLISH NEXT POST!


Edited by Atomicman - 11/12/15 at 4:45pm
post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 

 

Very nice example of an upside down turn. So who's the skier?

You don't want to know.   YM

post #41 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomicman View Post
 

Gobbly-gook!  Total bloviation!

 

Collision of your upper and lower body??? Really?  i SUBMIT YOUR UPPER AND LOWER BODY HAVE SEPARATION, CERTAINLY NOT COLLISION!

 

 BUT YOURCOM AND YOUR SKIS CROSS PATHS....THEY DON'T COLLIDE!  

 

 

 

Virtual bump is a widely understood concept. And it is not reliant on actually turning into a slope change....it is uh uh.......... wait for it ........................VIRTUAL!!!!!  

 

GOOD LORD....ATTEMPT TO SPEAK ENGLISH NEXT POST!

 

Hell Atomic Man. Where have you been? Well to answer your colorful question, I'm a big guy, 6'4", 200lbs and work to stay low in transition, If my legs want to fit crossing under me, I have to get my legs out of the way with a retraction. If I don't there is blockage. I'm calling it collision to better represent the compression forces that are being discussed. So, you think that the slope angle a ski is facing does not change from down the fall line to across the fall line? Where did you learn that? Do you remember which way the ball rolls when placed on the side of a hill? 

 

Thank you for supporting my point regarding "communication variables".  Nice drive by reply!

post #42 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by yogaman View Post
 

You don't want to know.   YM

 

Why do you think I asked? ;)

post #43 of 50
Is that still a sensitive area for some.
post #44 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 

 

Hell Atomic Man. Where have you been? Well to answer your colorful question, I'm a big guy, 6'4", 200lbs and work to stay low in transition, If my legs want to fit crossing under me, I have to get my legs out of the way with a retraction. If I don't there is blockage. I'm calling it collision to better represent the compression forces that are being discussed. So, you think that the slope angle a ski is facing does not change from down the fall line to across the fall line? Where did you learn that? Do you remember which way the ball rolls when placed on the side of a hill? 

 

Thank you for supporting my point regarding "communication variables".  

I don't think size is important  (just girth ;):D)

 

Really, It makes no difference what size you are.  And no matter how much you try to convince me in the course of normal skiing...... your lower and upper are NOT colliding.  If you simply mean you retract your legs while keeping your torso at the same height off the ground I will buy that. But to have a collision your upper body would have to be traveling down as your lower body travels up! If this is how you ski...ya got problems boy!   

 

But I believe what you are talking about is holding your upper body quiet and absorbing with your legs. In other words your head stays the same distance from the ground!

 

 Proportionately you don't need to get any lower than anyone else in transition.   

 

Seems to me cross under (down unweighted turns ) are what we are talking about here. Pretty standard fare.   

 

 

Now I want to hear you bloviate on cross-over non-retraction turns and the virtual bump! :confused:D 


Edited by Atomicman - 11/14/15 at 1:51pm
post #45 of 50

I find your approach to discussion very refreshing. The lack of disrespect and personalization was getting rather boring.

 

You are right that they are not colliding because I am retracting them. However, if I don't retract them enough what do you think is going to happen?

post #46 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich666 View Post
 

I find your approach to discussion very refreshing. The lack of disrespect and personalization was getting rather boring.

 

You are right that they are not colliding because I am retracting them. However, if I don't retract them enough what do you think is going to happen?

 

Well ya get jacked to the opposite side and must fight to keep balance......ya have to use extra effort to control the launch so you still end up on your new outside ski. (often you see mistimed transitions where you end up on the new inside ski too).

 

In other words you just have to use more effort to control the forces to keep from going ass over tea kettle. it is totally doable as every transition, retraction or not is not always perfectly timed. So what IS the consequence of a mismanaged (mistimed or wrong duration or wrong amount of retraction) transition? 

 

It is having manage these unbalancing forces in a controlled manner .... read smooth...that separates the men from the boys.  

 

 

Go with the flow!

post #47 of 50
Thread Starter 

The virtual bump is something that happens to any skier making turns with some speed.    

The non-existant "bump" feels like your skis are hitting a wall of resistance (the pretend bump), even though the snow is groomed.  

That resistance hits your skis after they pass the fall line.  

Skiers who "absorb the virtual bump" flex their legs as that pressure builds up, right after the fall line.  

 

What we've got so far regarding the teaching of this movement pattern is this:  

 

It can be taught as a release (jamt).

It can be taught as a way to smooth out the flow from one turn to another, as if you were running downstairs (Ghost).

Slider has suggested using backpedaling through turns to deal with this resistance (the animation of backpedaling in bumps), and says that getting upside down at the top of the next turn is made possible by absorbing/releasing this way.

jc-ski says it's just typical skiing.

Kneale teaches it to any level parallel skier; he finds that a soft snow day makes it easier to teach.

 

Did I get that right?  Did I miss any one?  
Got more?

post #48 of 50

ATOMICMAN !!!!!! How can you go with the flow when you don't have even a small fraction of human bio-mechanic range of motion of that of the rest of us? How do you demonstrate rotation, angulation, separation, absorption, etc. anyhow? The first bump you hit at speed and your going sailing out of control and you know it. However, I do know how it is once you get your self wound up and it's off to the races!  

 

post #49 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xela View Post
 

There was a mention of the turn forces being greater in phase 3 of the turn.  Isn't the virtual bump the primary reason for this?


At the top of the turn gravity is pulling the skier downhill while centrifugal force is pulling them uphill.  In the bottom of the turn gravity and centrifugal force are pulling the skier the same way, thus higher forces.  These forces can be handled by either partly bending the legs as the turn progresses (hard on knees & tiring for quads) or increasing the angle of the skis to the snow and increasing the skier's body angulation & counter.  To make a retraction turn (absorb a virtual bump), the legs need to be near-straight to start with; if the legs are bent at the end of the turn, an extension turn is the only option.

post #50 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoftSnowGuy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xela View Post
 

There was a mention of the turn forces being greater in phase 3 of the turn.  Isn't the virtual bump the primary reason for this?


At the top of the turn gravity is pulling the skier downhill while centrifugal force is pulling them uphill.  In the bottom of the turn gravity and centrifugal force are pulling the skier the same way, thus higher forces.  These forces can be handled by either partly bending the legs as the turn progresses (hard on knees & tiring for quads) or increasing the angle of the skis to the snow and increasing the skier's body angulation & counter.  To make a retraction turn (absorb a virtual bump), the legs need to be near-straight to start with; if the legs are bent at the end of the turn, an extension turn is the only option.


Two ways of looking at the same thing.  F=ma in  vectors with the curve set up in three dimensions is ok for engineers; stretching out the path and looking at the vertical change with length of path as a stairway with landings is more understandable to others, and provides a good example to correlate the reaction forces we feel.

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 › "Absorbing the virtual bump" for racers & recreational groomer skiers