or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Ski technique - Page 38

Ya I'm not sure some realize that lightening/flexing/relaxing/lifting the outside ski (main Base of Support) does precipitate the mass moving inside the turn. But, if everything went right in the old turn, then the mass is balanced *over* that (outside) ski and so when you remove that support most of your body's mass is on which side of the uphill lte? (rhetorical). What else BUT a new turn could result? It's not like you need to push across in this scenario, because most of "you" is already downhill of the uphill.

zenny
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiatansky

You seem to be under the impression that lifting the outside ski puts a bunch of weight on the inside ski and for many recreational skiers it probably does. But we are talking about WC racers and WC race speeds here. When the outside ski a WC racer is lifting is the base of support it causes an immediate release and a light transition because the racer's mass moves rapidly across the skis and down the fall line.

The best method to cause a heavy transition is with ILE where the outside leg doesn't flex while the inside leg is extended to push the skiers CoM up and over the skis. If the goal of WC SL/GS racers was a heavy transition we'd see them extending the inside leg to match the length of the already extended outside leg in the majority of transitions. But we don't see this much. Instead we see countless examples of a flexing the outside leg to release, which often leads to a light transition.

If there's any weight on the inside ski then retracting the outside ski will not result in being light unless the inside leg is also retracted.  Many many videos that I've analyzed show the inside leg extending at least some into transition for many transitions.  The only way that retracting just one leg would cause someone to be light is if the other leg is in the air.  Moving rapidly across the skis does not make someone light, because the movement is perpendicular to gravity.  Dropping into the turn happens as centrifugal force is building, so it's also not light, in fact as you are dropping in the turn the pressure on the skis increases.

Well I'm sort of with the Engineer on this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiatansky

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Engineer

A) You seem to be under the impression that lifting the outside ski puts a bunch of weight on the inside ski and for many recreational skiers it probably does. But we are talking about WC racers and WC race speeds here. When the outside ski a WC racer is lifting is the base of support it causes an immediate release and a light transition because the racer's mass moves rapidly across the skis and down the fall line.

The best method to cause a heavy transition is with ILE where the outside leg doesn't flex while the inside leg is extended to push the skiers CoM up and over the skis. If the goal of WC SL/GS racers was a heavy transition we'd see them extending the inside leg to match the length of the already extended outside leg in the majority of transitions. But we don't see this much. Instead we see countless examples of a flexing the outside leg to release, which often leads to a light transition.

A) So what if the outside leg is either not the base of support, or the mass is too far uphill? You can flex the outside ski, lift it to your ear, but you ain't going down hill. This happens to recreational skiers all the time since they often don't use their momentum.

As for World Cup racers, that's a pretty broad brush. Seems in this thread everyone is so absolutist. Maybe sometims you'll want to release right away, maybe you don't. See the link of Ted delaying. Essentially doing the move to the uphill ski before release.
Also See Zenny's comment 2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune

1) Ya I'm not sure some realize that lightening/flexing/relaxing/lifting the outside ski (main Base of Support) does precipitate the mass moving inside the turn.

2) But, if everything went right in the old turn, then the mass is balanced *over* that (outside) ski and so when you remove that support most of your body's mass is on which side of the uphill lte? (rhetorical). What else BUT a new turn could result? It's not like you need to push across in this scenario, because most of "you" is already downhill of the uphill.

zenny

1) Again, mass too far uphill lifting the downhill leg does nothing except make one shaky. One needs your 2) point.

2) Yes! Please mail this to the consortium. :-) Flex to release only works if you're in the right position.

Shocking fact # 2: You can put yourself in position and use momentum so everything (the edges) just switches at transition. Somehow, this is against various religious doctrines. Yet Psiman, as an inert and dumb metal object manages to make turns that way.

Here's Ted last year doing the move to uphill ski. Similar to what TJ Lanning was talking about.
http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/posted-11-2015/content/Ligety-Vail-2015-GS-2A-11x14_large.html

Low- high- low

Marcel in a similar low-high-low turn:
http://www.ronlemaster.com/images/posted-11-2015/content/Hirscher-Lenzerheide-2014-GS-1-13x13-B_large.html
That's not against my err, "religion" Tog. I'm a former racer and current PSIA instructor and trainer...

zenny
Quote:
Originally Posted by zentune

That's not against my err, "religion" Tog. I'm a former racer and current PSIA instructor and trainer...

zenny
Yes, I know Zen! Its the boiled chicken recipe.

Shocking fact #56  first GS training today, my racer couldn't really figure out the new big GS skis he's got. So... transfer early to the new outside ski and push yourself forward... couple runs of that worked like a charm. That's what he needed (among other things), so that's what he got...

Let me quote someone wise:

Quote:

Razie said: The WC GS ski is a forward detection device: it will turn if you're forward and it will not turn if you're not !

Digest that for a bit...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog

TJ Lanning at a 2010 USST training camp.

0:06-

"Today we're workin' on initiation and finish of each gs turn. Really movin' to the new ski with a really strong move before you start divin' down uh.. down the fall line"

1:14 -

"...coming through the gate, and what I would want to do, instead of just switching everything and falling down the hill - you actually want to move into your uphill ski, and then almost exaggerate it by picking- taking the weight almost completely off your old ski . And then building- really building a platform, and then driving everything down the fall line."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QeLgVnzQQnw

Quote:
Originally Posted by razie

Digest that for a bit...

Start at :45 and watch for 15 seconds.

WAIT, wrong video.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc-ski

Sorry, haven't read every single post - has this been shared here before?

( Posted recently by someone else (who can claim credit if they care to) in another thread. )

:43 seconds in
^^^What about it?

zenny
I was letting Razie know that "forward" was digested pages ago. It seemed like he had an epiphany. Haha

Don't want anyone's head to explode, (at me, or otherwise), but could this possibly be a modern, high performance version of the good old stem christie?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jc-ski

Don't want anyone's head to explode, (at me, or otherwise), but could this possibly be a modern, high performance version of the good old stem christie?

Mechanically it is more a step and not a stem. Balance-wise, some of what happens after pressure transfer resembles a stem but except for exciting moments there will normally be no covergence. Plus there is no good analog to the need to have rolled over the sweet spot of the new outside ski at the moment you get on the new inside edge, in the stem. But at core yes there are common elements.
That's from the Travis Ganong vid below?
There's no stem. Watch in real time slo mo. From 0:53 His outside leg is way out there and he's coming out of it.
In the opening sequence he lifts the downhill ski and narrows his stance. Then after rolls to new edges. So an inward stem of sorts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jc-ski

Sorry, haven't read every single post - has this been shared here before?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Engineer

If there's any weight on the inside ski then retracting the outside ski will not result in being light unless the inside leg is also retracted.  Many many videos that I've analyzed show the inside leg extending at least some into transition for many transitions.  The only way that retracting just one leg would cause someone to be light is if the other leg is in the air.  Moving rapidly across the skis does not make someone light, because the movement is perpendicular to gravity.  Dropping into the turn happens as centrifugal force is building, so it's also not light, in fact as you are dropping in the turn the pressure on the skis increases.

Wrong but believe what you will.

If both skis are off the ground isn't that light by definition?
Or...heavy in the air?

While flexsion and extension of the legs may release edge grip on the snow neither does anything for edge change or transition.  In fact flexion merely allows the COM to move towards the BOS while extension does the opposite. They are merely pressure control movements.

So claims of either being responsible for anything other than the above in transition are false.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Engineer

If there's any weight on the inside ski then retracting the outside ski will not result in being light unless the inside leg is also retracted.  Many many videos that I've analyzed show the inside leg extending at least some into transition for many transitions.  The only way that retracting just one leg would cause someone to be light is if the other leg is in the air.  Moving rapidly across the skis does not make someone light, because the movement is perpendicular to gravity.  Dropping into the turn happens as centrifugal force is building, so it's also not light, in fact as you are dropping in the turn the pressure on the skis increases.

The bold is true.  If you really look at most WC racing turn transitions you see the inside leg extending while the outside is flexing.  Most turns are finished right after the gate and that is where the transition starts.  Look from that moment on and you can see it.

Ok loki, extend your uphill right leg and and flex your dh left leg AND TURN RIGHT. Good luck with that..edit to say: I know what you are trying to say, so say it! Shortcuts kill.
So....At apex we need to ..
Ok loki, extend your uphill right leg and and flex your dh left leg AND TURN RIGHT. Good luck with that..edit to say: I know what you are trying to say, so say it! Shortcut kill

Actually that's exactly what you would do, continue to turn right, if those were the movements you made.

I said what I was trying to say. Flexion/extension movements are pressure control movements not edging movements. No secrets there. What are you implying I mean?
And yet flexing or extending can both have a direct influence on the chosen method of turn entry as well, in regards to steered, pivoted, tipped. The details will lie in the dirt.

zenny

The outcome of flexing is very different if you take the motion of the body in question into account. Flexing removes the motive force that has been warping my bodies path into a curve. Without that force my body will travel in a straight line which will cross the path of the skis changing the edges. So, If all I did to accomplish this change of edges was to flex one leg then how can one say that flexing is not a cause of edge change?

fom

So what's the big difference between a COM release and a flexing to release?
Quote:
Originally Posted by loki1

While flexsion and extension of the legs may release edge grip on the snow neither does anything for edge change or transition.  In fact flexion merely allows the COM to move towards the BOS while extension does the opposite.

If it is fact that flexion allows the CoM to move towards the base of support then it is also a fact that removing the base of support via flexion causes a transition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman

The outcome of flexing is very different if you take the motion of the body in question into account. Flexing removes the motive force that has been warping my bodies path into a curve. Without that force my body will travel in a straight line which will cross the path of the skis changing the edges. So, If all I did to accomplish this change of edges was to flex one leg then how can one say that flexing is not a cause of edge change?

fom

Removing the reaction force that maintains the body moving in a curve will cause the body to move towards the skis, not a straight line across the skis.  The reason is when in balance the centrifugal forces combine with the gravitational forces to give a net force in line with the body pointing towards the base of support.  The body moves in line with the net force.  Gravity is always present, so the only way you can move in a straight line across the skis is if there is a leg that pushes against gravity.  If there's an upwards acceleration before retracting the legs, then the body can take a curved trajectory across the skis like throwing a ball. You can't eliminate up moves and ski rebound, and then merely retract the legs to float across the skis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Engineer

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman

The outcome of flexing is very different if you take the motion of the body in question into account. Flexing removes the motive force that has been warping my bodies path into a curve. Without that force my body will travel in a straight line which will cross the path of the skis changing the edges. So, If all I did to accomplish this change of edges was to flex one leg then how can one say that flexing is not a cause of edge change?

fom

Removing the reaction force that maintains the body moving in a curve will cause the body to move towards the skis, not a straight line across the skis.  The reason is when in balance the centrifugal forces combine with the gravitational forces to give a net force in line with the body pointing towards the base of support.  The body moves in line with the net force.  Gravity is always present, so the only way you can move in a straight line across the skis is if there is a leg that pushes against gravity.  If there's an upwards acceleration before retracting the legs, then the body can take a curved trajectory across the skis like throwing a ball. You can't eliminate up moves and ski rebound, and then merely retract the legs to float across the skis.

It really is a function of how many Gs you're pulling, right? which is a function of the inclination of the COM (i.e. ski angle). So if you're pulling 3g and you simply take away the leg, by relaxing it, your COM will accelerate to the outside of the turn (i.e. over the skis) 3 times more than down towards the snow. By the way, as you transition, the slope falls away from you at what, 30, 40 degrees? May want to take reality into account... and figure out if G even matters much.

Re-check your centripetal force vectors there, or let Ron LeMaster know that he completely screwed up on the platform angle thing...

This thread is really getting long in the tooth, and the more coaches I see teaching racers to pop up "tall" in a GS transition, the less patience I have and I got my fair share today. As if "tall" helps. I'd take "heavy and forward" over "tall" I think... at least there's some finality in that... not that this changes how Ted skis though!

The only really good value I got out of this thread has been the reminder of Phil McNichols words at the end of the video... minute I don't know, 18-19:something?

later.

Quote:
Originally Posted by razie

It really is a function of how many Gs you're pulling, right? which is a function of the inclination of the COM (i.e. ski angle). So if you're pulling 3g and you simply take away the leg, by relaxing it, your COM will accelerate to the outside of the turn (i.e. over the skis) 3 times more than down towards the snow. By the way, as you transition, the slope falls away from you at what, 30, 40 degrees? May want to take reality into account... and figure out if G even matters much.

Re-check your centripetal force vectors there, or let Ron LeMaster know that he completely screwed up on the platform angle thing...

This thread is really getting long in the tooth, and the more coaches I see teaching racers to pop up "tall" in a GS transition, the less patience I have and I got my fair share today. As if "tall" helps. I'd take "heavy and forward" over "tall" I think... at least there's some finality in that... not that this changes how Ted skis though!

The only really good value I got out of this thread has been the reminder of Phil McNichols words at the end of the video... minute I don't know, 18-19:something?

later.

If you increase the centrifugal force, then you also increase the angle of the body to stay balanced.  The fact that you are balanced equates the gravitational force with the centrifugal force to give you a net force in line with your body.  So, even with larger centrifugal forces you will still move towards the skis, not across them.  There will be more horizontal movement per vertical movement with larger body angles and more centrifugal force, but the skis are more to the side and less beneath you.  The bottom line is that the vectors always line up with the body when you are balanced (otherwise you are falling), and acceleration moves in the direction of the net force.  This thread is long in the tooth, but if you want to shorten it, you can stop saying things like "Recheck your centripetal force vectors" when you have no idea what you are talking about.

razie,

In this case its not Gs that count but just velocity. When you release the com by removing the bos the com starts to follow an arc that will intersect with the ground at some point. If we have set things up right then long before that we will have crossed the skis for edge change and began moving in the other direction. Its not so much release and catch and release and redirect.

fom

Quote:
Originally Posted by jc-ski

Don't want anyone's head to explode, (at me, or otherwise), but could this possibly be a modern, high performance version of the good old stem christie?

I don't think it's a Christie because Christie means skidded turn.  YM

Quote:
Originally Posted by razie

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Engineer

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldman

The outcome of flexing is very different if you take the motion of the body in question into account. Flexing removes the motive force that has been warping my bodies path into a curve. Without that force my body will travel in a straight line which will cross the path of the skis changing the edges. So, If all I did to accomplish this change of edges was to flex one leg then how can one say that flexing is not a cause of edge change?

fom

Removing the reaction force that maintains the body moving in a curve will cause the body to move towards the skis, not a straight line across the skis.  The reason is when in balance the centrifugal forces combine with the gravitational forces to give a net force in line with the body pointing towards the base of support.  The body moves in line with the net force.  Gravity is always present, so the only way you can move in a straight line across the skis is if there is a leg that pushes against gravity.  If there's an upwards acceleration before retracting the legs, then the body can take a curved trajectory across the skis like throwing a ball. You can't eliminate up moves and ski rebound, and then merely retract the legs to float across the skis.

It really is a function of how many Gs you're pulling, right? which is a function of the inclination of the COM (i.e. ski angle). So if you're pulling 3g and you simply take away the leg, by relaxing it, your COM will accelerate to the outside of the turn (i.e. over the skis) 3 times more than down towards the snow. By the way, as you transition, the slope falls away from you at what, 30, 40 degrees? May want to take reality into account... and figure out if G even matters much.

Re-check your centripetal force vectors there, or let Ron LeMaster know that he completely screwed up on the platform angle thing...

This thread is really getting long in the tooth, and the more coaches I see teaching racers to pop up "tall" in a GS transition, the less patience I have and I got my fair share today. As if "tall" helps. I'd take "heavy and forward" over "tall" I think... at least there's some finality in that... not that this changes how Ted skis though!

The only really good value I got out of this thread has been the reminder of Phil McNichols words at the end of the video... minute I don't know, 18-19:something?

later.

If you are using a ground reaction force to make you turn with 3g of centripetal acceleration and you suddenly remove that force (eg by flexion), your body will continue along a path tangent to the turn at the point of time it is released.  You can of course release a little less suddenly (and usually do) and keep curving your CoM around a bit more.  Because your skis keep going around the turn for a bit longer (how much longer is up to you), from a frame of reference moving with the skier's eyes (what you see when you're skiing), you do  go across the skis in that frame of reference.   And looking from above, your CoM does go straighter down the hill than your skis do and they also cross at some point, just by releasing the CoM, no need to push it up.

Re: bolded part of quote.  Yes somewhat getting old, some of the circus performers could use a new act.  Couldn't you have dissed or used a vernacular expression against some renowned coaches so we could have a change of complaints.

Regarding video.  If you are not strong enough to press the new ski from that low a position is easy to understand if you consider doing leg presses on a universal machine.  You can (or at least I could the last time I tried) press 10 times your weight if your knees are only bent a slight amount to begin with, but good luck trying that with your knees starting at an acute angle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost

If you are using a ground reaction force to make you turn with 3g of centripetal acceleration and you suddenly remove that force (eg by flexion), your body will continue along a path tangent to the turn at the point of time it is released.  You can of course release a little less suddenly (and usually do) and keep curving your CoM around a bit more.  Because your skis keep going around the turn for a bit longer (how much longer is up to you), from a frame of reference moving with the skier's eyes (what you see when you're skiing), you do  go across the skis in that frame of reference.   And looking from above, your CoM does go straighter down the hill than your skis do and they also cross at some point, just by releasing the CoM, no need to push it up.

Re: bolded part of quote.  Yes somewhat getting old, some of the circus performers could use a new act.  Couldn't you have dissed or used a vernacular expression against some renowned coaches so we could have a change of complaints.

Regarding video.  If you are not strong enough to press the new ski from that low a position is easy to understand if you consider doing leg presses on a universal machine.  You can (or at least I could the last time I tried) press 10 times your weight if your knees are only bent a slight amount to begin with, but good luck trying that with your knees starting at an acute angle.

I repeat.  You do not go straight across your skis just by releasing.  When you release you move directly towards your skis at that moment.  Can you get across your skis by following the tangent before you fall too low?  I'm with tdk on this one.  Stand with your feet on the ground, and retract your legs.  How much time do you have before you must catch your self?  Can you get all the way across your skis in that time without seeing an excessive drop in the COM?  I don't think so.  There's some upward acceleration before retracting the legs to float, or there's support by the legs for holding weight through transition.  Just flexing and floating across the skis is not an option.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Ski Instruction & Coaching
This thread is locked