or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › ski lesson-parallel ski in one day (the title of the posted YouTube video)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# ski lesson-parallel ski in one day (the title of the posted YouTube video) - Page 2

And why is this guy "really" turning?

In that isolation exercise he does at the start...

1. he plants the downhill pole below him

2. he lifts up the new inside ski (downhill ski)

3. which leaves him standing on the LTE (little toe edge) of the new outside ski (uphill ski)

4. he pushes himself off in the downhill direction with the uphill pole

5. as he moves his whole upper body downhill towards the grip of his pole

6. this flattens the ski he's standing on so it loses its grip

... and magically that ski turns and takes him downhill.

tdk, I think you are asking about the magic part, right?

Edited by LiquidFeet - 9/28/16 at 10:24am

Here are the push-offs using that uphill pole:

:

Like stated and implied by LiquidFeet:

1.  The guy in the green's initial static demo turn is initiated by an uphill pole push off (to compensate for a lack of Momentum or Gravity).

2.  Later, his turns are initiated by Momentum working on a moving flat ski - which if you distribute more Pressure to the front of the ski - will cause the front of the ski to seek the fall line.  Thereafter, turns can be completed by Edging or Rotating the ski to the intended direction of travel with transitions to initiate a new turn by standing on a flat/off-Edge ski with Pressure forward seeking the fall line and then turning out of the fall line to complete the new turn by Edge or Rotation.

3.  Even later, his turns are initiated by increased Momentum created by increased slope angle/Gravity working on a flat/off-Edge ski.

And I keep explanations to a minimum and only after my students have experienced an event.  My intermediate students intuitively know that certain movements are more successful with a steeper slope which takes advantage of Gravity and/or more Momentum.  That's why we are practicing those movements on an intermediate slope and not a beginner slope.

So in summary, the video shows turns initiated by:  1.  Physical Action (uphill pole push off) of the skier**;  2.  Momentum of moving skis which are flat/off-Edge with forward Pressure;  3.  Gravity working on a flat ski (which if the slope is steep enough will initiate a turn from a standing/stopped non-moving ski entirely devoid of Momentum).

I don't see anything particularly wrong with the video.  It would be less confusing to his students/watchers if he started his static demo on a steeper slope so he didn't have to introduce the uphill pole push off as a part of the drill.*

It is not quite how I teach, but to each his own.

*  However, under the right circumstances an uphill pole push off is not an incorrect movement.  In fact, all movements are "correct" (even if not necessarily efficient) if they achieve the intended outcome.  For instance, witness the double pole plant by some of the expert bump skiers in videos earlier in this thread.

**  He could have used Physical Action of the skier to push off an uphill ski rather than with the uphill pole.  I don't advocate a push off of any sort at this level of teaching (I prefer to demo a "patience turn initiation" to reduce variables for the students), but if a push off is required, I prefer most physical actions to occur with the feet, because especially my adults students are hand/eye oriented and I want them to become foot/snow oriented.  An uphill ski push off is a skating move which I will eventually make them do on their own by "Do what I do." whether I tell them about it/explain it or not.

*** Oh, and one more thing.  This video shows the "pick up the soon to be new uphill/inside ski to initiate parallel turns" drill/move that SkiMangoJazz or MyGolfAnalogy told me about that PSIA uses and warned me that I would create micro wedges with my opposite focus on big lateral Pressure/Edge transfer to the new downhill/outside ski.  As I said, I will experiment with it this season.  But here is my deal.  I don't have a problem with flat ski wedging.  Oh my God !!!  Heresy !!!  Beginners beware !!!  Have you ever skied with Patrollers for Christ's sake?!?!  They have refined to perfection the wedge-to-parallel turn.  A triangle is a very, very, very strong structure.  The wedge is the skier's triangle.  Now the way I get the wedge "to go away" for parallel turns is to teach carving/Edge-based Parallel turns first.  Which I have found is easier to teach my students (with parabolic skis) than a rounded-skidded true-parallel/without wedge steered/rotated flat/-Edge-off types of turns.  The Edge-based carved parallel turn uses the ski's design to create instant true parallel success for the student.  It provides a non-skidding "on-the-rails" platform for me to put them into proper Balance and counter.  The latter flat ski skidded/rotated turn requires a sophisticated blend of Rotational/Pressure/Edge/Balance skier-based physical input to make what, in my humble opinion, is a very complicated parallel turn - a high end turn if you will.  IMHO, the latter turn should only be taught after the carved true-parallel turn is learned and so that the lateral Pressure transfer and proper Balance and counter learned during the carved parallel turn may be used to help learn the flat ski skidded rotational turn.

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/28/16 at 9:17am

Tim, about a decade ago as a school (S3 of Aspen) had tried the carved from the beginning approach for a number of years and the director and inner circle of their ed staff scrapped it. The big problem was that was the students were stuck in a turn without the ability to change where the sidecut of the skis would take them. Passengers rather than drivers if you will. What we replaced that progression with was a more traditional multi skilled progression. Edge engagement was part of that but so too was effective steering skills as well as the idea that pressure control both foot to foot and fore / aft were fundamentally necessary.

Stenmark was the king of that sequential stepping sort of transition. Some of us old guys still remember his step and roll moves and the fact that the WC guys are bringing it back speaks volumes about new to some doesn't really mean it's all that new. It also shouldn't be a surprise that he used diverging and converging skis along with those sequential release and reengagement moves. But back to beginners and parallel on their first day, Stepping to hasten the end of the turn is an intermediate phase in the learning process. (not to be confused with intermediate skiing levels) Once the student can accomplish that they have a bail out option and getting them to shuffle their feet through the turn completion becomes a second option, as does simply steering their feet without the shuffling. But at the release point no lateral step is needed if the skis are not held on that critical edge angle. This in turn facilitates the possibility of performing simultaneous releases by simply un-tipping both skis equally. Foot to foot and fore to aft shifts in pressure thus become a consequence of the forces involved and incidental stances rather than any proactive movement. Something the parallel beginner turn shares with the beginner wedge maneuver where so many erroneously add active foot to foot weight transfers.

justanotherskipro - I would not go as far as using the word "erroneously" for an active weight transfer. Its just the old school approach and nothing more to it. Think Stenmark era. And just like stepping and diverging ski tips also the active weight transfer has its rightful place now and in the future. Not arguing, just saying.

I agree with you on the carving bit. Its basically just racing juniors in ski club racing programs that go straight from the wedge to carving. That is in a way a lost generation since every other condition besides a groomed flat slope will not be any fun to ski for them. They on the other hand never encounter such situations before they drop out and start dating.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdk6

justanotherskipro - I would not go as far as using the word "erroneously" for an active weight transfer. Its just the old school approach and nothing more to it. Think Stenmark era. And just like stepping and diverging ski tips also the active weight transfer has its rightful place now and in the future. Not arguing, just saying.

I agree with you on the carving bit. Its basically just racing juniors in ski club racing programs that go straight from the wedge to carving. That is in a way a lost generation since every other condition besides a groomed flat slope will not be any fun to ski for them. They on the other hand never encounter such situations before they drop out and start dating.

This must be true for many ski students, at least the ones that take lessons, because so many ski instructors agree.  My experience is different, however.  I went from snow plow turn to stem Christey, to carving, concentrated on carving on hard snow for a few years, discovered deep snow out west after about a decade of skiing the east, and enjoyed all kinds of snow conditions (from solid ice to 30' feet of untracked snow) and different terrain (from cliffs to flats) for many decades.  It's only when I got old, too old and out of shape to ski Tremblant's bumps at full speed, that I decided to better my non-carved skiing.

Thanks, JASP, tdk6, Ghost, and hopefully others to come.  I am here to revitalize my teaching and to improve my personal skiing through cross-fertilization with you guys and gals.  And to get the most benefit, I have to expose my techniques heresies and all.  Since I teach through exaggeration, personally I like showing how Edging works.  Then dialing it back to the flat ski wedge to a steered ski and then maybe to parallel.  I will make sure that I spend at least the same amount of time on that side of the edging/pressure coin in my introduction to parallel intermediate lessons.  I was hoping to get LiquidFeet to pile on too, I can take it.  If something rings true to me, I will experiment with it.  I think I am a pretty good teacher now (I can see the improvement objectively in my students), but I know I can get better.  And reading what you guys and gals post in this Instruction and Coaching forum helps.

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/28/16 at 4:36pm

TDK, this is a tangent to the parallel topic but I feel it is important to add it here.

Varying the edge angles in a wedge conserves the opposing edge requirement and the gliding wedge requirement without any need for any active weight transfers. It also is a mechanism for releasing an engaged edge because once the critical edge angle is not there the skis will slip without any change in pressure. Linear momentum will automatically shift weight there in the proper amount without our adding a step, or any other weight shifting moves. Making an active weight shift superfluous and an error. This slipping state also facilitates rotary steering inputs that are so much part of that gliding wedge maneuver. It's also worth mentioning how much more responsive today's skis are and that effectively means we should be modifying our movements to take advantage of these newer ski designs. As it always has been every time the equipment changes. For me it also means using antiquated forms out of habit rather than actual functional need is where I would disagree with the idea of hanging onto older variations of the maneuver

It really comes down to efficacy, even in the beginner corral I would add. Which at higher certification levels becomes a very important issue. Innaccurate demos that feature exaggeration are in a word innaccurate. So even though the practice has a long history of use to get a student to use a wider RoM. The problems start with the instructor who when performing that exaggerated movement pattern also crerates an exaggerated response from the skis. You just cannot get around that. The physics don't allow that. It sounds a bit harsh but it comes back to the old saying  You cannot fake the right outcome exaggerating your movements.

Edited by justanotherskipro - 9/28/16 at 5:47pm

JASP, fair enough.  I adopted my exaggeration teaching method from Warren Witherell's Athletic Skier book (boy you should see the exaggerated edge exploration photos in there!). The tracks in the snow do not lie.  They are either diverging, converging or parallel.  But so I completely understand your constructive criticism, the bigger question based on your last post is:

What is your definition of the "right outcome."

https://www.amazon.com/Athletic-Skier-Warren-Witherell/dp/1555661173?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-d-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1555661173

And what is your progression to achieve it?

P.S. Don't blame Mr. Witherell if I read it wrong!

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/28/16 at 10:12pm

I use exaggerated movements in my skiing. However, when I compare myself to any WC racer, not to mention a gymnastics athlete or even a monkey on TV, it looks like I'm hardly moving at all. Those exaggerated movements performed in a ski instructor environment feel awkward to start with but from a viewers perspective they don't look exaggerated at akk and after a while they are part of your muscle memory and feel totally natural.

Tim asked a valid question, what is your definition of the right outcome? For me the right outcome depends on what I am teaching. There is no one single outcome that I'm working towards that would be the only right one. Everything has to be learned in steps.

The first thing I teach my students is getting used to the equipment, the angled snow element and balance. When it comes to balance the single most important thing to learn is how to stay upright in the sideways plane. This is where "angulation" and "counter weighting" comes into play. That's the way we balance while standing. If we topple to the left we need to move our CoM to the right but the intuitive way of doing so is not necessarily the right way because students usually try to move their head and upper body to the right. This is the opposite of what they should do because if they go right with their head, shoulders and upper body they push their hips left and they keep on toppling to the left. Instead they should weight the left foot by moving their head and upper body in the left direction, face the fear, overcome the fear by leaning into it, while their CoM moves to the right together with the hips and proper balance is regained. So the "angulation", the "counter weighting" and the "active weight transfer" that are/is so commonly seen as negative movements are actually part of the most natural balancing movements we do. When we learn something that is right in an exaggerated way we can refine it later. Its harder to approach this from the other end. To teach someone with ingrained wrong movements the right movements in a refined way.

So I try to teach my students how to angulate when wedging as a first step. I could also express myself a bit different and say that I teach them outside ski pressure. Or how to balance. The active weight transfer is nothing but counterbalancing. No bid deal. Except if you don't do it.

It really isn't an advanced concept fellas. A specific action creates a specific outcome. A different action creates a different outcome. So it comes down to accuracy nothing more. I often use analogies and for this one I am going to talk about driving. Our actions need to fall within a narrow range or we lose control of the car. It is why so many new drivers are so much more likely to have accidents. They overdo something like over correct and the car does exactly what it was instructed to do. Beginning skiers are already going to have a bit of that unrefined movement quality so adding to it is a questionable teaching method. If you feel compelled to use the exaggerated demo tool it must be clearly identified as such to the student or they will not view it in the proper context.

10-4.  JASP, verbally and clearly I tell my students that "I teach through exaggeration"  (I also tell them that I initially teach through gross manipulation of their upper body to cause a severe weight transfer to the downhill/outside ski) so my students can feel both the input of and the output from that Pressure transfer and Edge engagement.  And once they get the feeling of "riding the ski on rails" rather than Z-turn pivoting a flat/Edge-off ski, I have them start dialing it back to a more refined input focused at the ski/snow interface especially via "follow me" traverses.*

Using your car analogy.  Think of me as the skid pan of ski instruction.  Might as well learn in a safe environment how to, what it feels like, and how far and how fast you can push your car into and out of a turn before you lose traction.  Then keep it under that limit in your personal skiing/driving.

I don't think I have it at home, but I will find my copy of the Athletic Skier and post up that picture of Warren showing how to feel/experience the Edging skill for the first time.  It is even more exaggerated than I teach.

* But quite frankly the latter, subtle ankle/boot/knee tip in (femur rotation) movement is scary for them.  They are afraid that they will trip over their feet if they make that Pressure/Edge move with their feet.  In contrast, they are not afraid that they will trip over their feet if they make that Pressure/Edge movement with their locked ankle, leg, hip, torso - skeletal structure.  So, that's what I use to achieve instant Pressure/Edging success. Once they feel it and know they can do it, we work on doing it with the boot only.  If you think about it, it is the same with skating for the first time.  First you skate with your legs stiff and leaning on your leg/ski.  Then you start to angle your boot to push off with the outside ski inside edge.  Then you start to learn to also push off with the inside ski outside edge when moving it to the lateral position to begin push off.  I do this with rollerblades, but it is too much work for me on skis because I am too undisciplined to practice which would develop the muscles for me to do it properly.  Everybody laughs at my skating on skis.  In my Level II exam the only way I passed the skating task was because I was able to beat my assigned opponent in a one-on-one.  Not because of proper form.  I would fail miserably a Level III skating task.

As far as my beginner progression, LF and I discussed this a while back and I posted a detailed description of it then. It starts with bootwork and flat work just like most beginner progressions. All three skill pools are addressed and practiced prior to putting on a ski, they are repeated with one ski, then two. It diverges from the wedge progression only at the straight run stage. Herringbones and side steps, star turns and circle the wagons activities are all common to both progressions. But most beginners have one over riding concern, how to stop. Terrain like a swale allows them to glide down one side of the swale in a parallel stance and naturally stop as the skis ride up the other side. Terrain based teaching works on this same principle BTW. Use the naturally occuring external forces rather than our muscles to create braking. From there step J turns to a stop takes the idea of using terrain for speed control one step further. For the timid adding a wedge is an option but in doing so it limits the mobility we have been working so hard on to that point. Linked shallow stepped turns follow as do shuffled turns and simply steered turns. I could go on for a chapter or two about the physics of a line based version of terrain based teaching and how it becomes the common fundamental decision making tool for skiers at all levels but here at Epic I choose to leave it at the basic overview stage. Those interested in a more complete version are invited to come out and do a workshop where all those minute details are discussed as part of my classroom follow ups. (Usually an apreski session with munchies and drinks)
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

As far as my beginner progression, LF and I discussed this a while back and I posted a detailed description of it then. It starts with bootwork and flat work just like most beginner progressions. All three skill pools are addressed and practiced prior to putting on a ski  Yup, I do this too.  It is invaluable IMO., they are repeated with one ski, then two. It diverges from the wedge progression only at the straight run stage. Herringbones and side steps, star turns and circle the wagons activities are all common to both progressions. But most beginners have one over riding concern, how to stop. Terrain like a swale allows them to glide down one side of the swale in a parallel stance and naturally stop as the skis ride up the other side. Terrain based teaching works on this same principle BTW. Use the naturally occuring external forces rather than our muscles to create braking. From there step J turns to a stop takes the idea of using terrain for speed control one step further. For the timid adding a wedge is an option but in doing so it limits the mobility we have been working so hard on to that point. Linked shallow stepped turns follow as do shuffled turns and simply steered turns. I could go on for a chapter or two about the physics of a line based version of terrain based teaching and how it becomes the common fundamental decision making tool for skiers at all levels but here at Epic I choose to leave it at the basic overview stage. Those interested in a more complete version are invited to come out and do a workshop where all those minute details are discussed as part of my classroom follow ups. (Usually an apreski session with munchies and drinks)

And that's about where our similarities in teaching end.

JASP, seriously and respectfully,* you no doubt are a better teacher, better skier, went to better schools and are better looking than me, and I used to do the remainder of what you describe above, but I dispense with it all because it just tires my flat-lander first-timer students out.  So, I expedite it to a braking wedge with repeated carpet runs where they learn to stop and to turn right without assistance of terrain.  And I get two to three runs with them on the chair while others are still in the pit.  I know my beginner terrain and, by the time they are ready for the chair, I know each one of my beginners by name and by their strengths and weaknesses.

Subtlety is not my strength.  So, I eschew it and go with what has proven to work for me.

*  Edit:   FYI All,   JASP recently said  "Having just completed my 40th season on snow, 37th season as a pro (13 full time) And having served as a trainer for most of those 37 years, I see Epic's value in the variety of ideas and perspectives expressed. It has made me sensitive to what role I am fulfilling for the clinic I am teaching."  So, serious respect to you JASP.  I get it.

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/29/16 at 10:50am
Tim we cross posted so this post mught help steer you in a slightly different direction about exaggeration. As a beginner most folks are a bit conservative and it manifests as their limited range of motion. Especially in their first attempt doing a new move. Same goes for the excess tension they hold in their body. Jerky, unrefined moves throw them out of balance and shift their focus to recovering balance rather than performing the task as prescribed. So just getting them comfortable gliding in a reasonably centered stance has to precede turns of any sort. From there moving around and creating unbalance stances is possible but just standing on a moving ski is stiil a challenge for them. Making those exaggerated unbalanced stances a harder than necessary task. Quitting with the impression that the sport is too hard becomes more likely. Throttle back on the extremes and give them a chance to grow at a more reasonable pace and they will be far more likely to take another lesson with you.
As far as Warren, he was the headmaster of a race academy my kid attended and he wrote his book a quite a while back. I like and respect him a lot but others just as respected differ on the subject of exaggerated demos down at that beginner level. Over time we all play with ideas like exaggeration and move past it when we refine our teaching further. It works but like most short cuts it has consequences down the road. Discipline, deliberate, and directionally relevent moves are the hallmark of good skiing at all levels. Excess is not, just sayin...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Hodgson

And that's about where our similarities in teaching end.

JASP, seriously and respectfully, you no doubt are a better teacher, better skier, went to better schools and are better looking than me, and I used to do the remainder of what you describe, but I dispense with it all because it just tires my flat-lander first-timer students out.  So, I expedite it to a breaking wedge with repeated carpet runs where they learn to stop and to turn right without assistance of terrain.  And I get two to three runs with them on the chair while others are still in the pit.  I know my beginner terrain, and by the time for the chair I know each one of my beginners and their strengths and weakenesses.

Subtlety is not my strength.  So, I eschew it and go with what has proven to work for me.

Tim,  first on the chair is not always the best measurement of success.  Spending a bit more time on the carpet gives people who have put on skis for the first time in their life an opportunity to get comfortable on skis and to learn some of the basic skills.   Time spent in the "pit" as you say, can be quite valuable.    It seems like many instructors want to rush people to more difficult terrain too quickly often at the expense of the student.   You may get them several runs on the chair but what skills do you allow them to develop for their next day on skis.  Remember, this is all new to them so many of them are not concerned about how many chair rides they get.    Part of being a good instructor is not forcing our expectations on our students.

The one question I have is your statement about using exaggerated upper body motion to get them to feel the weight transfer (that Is what I thought you said and correct me if I am wrong).

Why would you want to do this?  We see too many skiers using upper body rotation and many students will do this without being taught.   This is one movement I would not want beginners to use.

Skier31, thank you for your post. I teach to the student, so yes, that means that my goal is to meet each student's individual expectations. Sometimes I am the instructor who stays in the pit with those who need the most work.  Sometimes I am the one first to the chair with the strong students after our athletic split.  Regardless of class size and ability, I teach to the student.  It is not a first to the chair mentality.

As far as skills go, I am sure by now that you are familiar with the PSIA-Hodgson Skills mod?

FB/ERP

The number one skill I send them home with that afternoon after their first time lesson is:  FUN !!!

I don't teach upper body rotation. I introduce downhill/outside ski Pressure with Edge and Angulation with exaggeration from the upper body down.  And per JASP's post above, it is neither jerky nor excessive, just an exaggeration of the Pressure and Edging skill.  (And yes it is more pronounced part of my teaching at the intro to parallel lesson, but is used by me a little even for beginners to counteract the left-hand compound fall line on one of our bunny runs.  See post # 2 and 17 here:

http://www.epicski.com/t/147474/ski-school-demo-wedge-to-parallel-video

I would love to see your comments in response to those two posts in that thread.

I won't re-post them here because I have this tendency of messing up tdk6's threads and I have no ego to do that here.  So far tdk6 has been pretty forgiving (but I think I owe him beers as well as a few others on this forum...).  Maybe I should make my own "heresy" thread so I can be the proper target and the flames can be contained in my own thread?  But because I have learned some stuff here on Epic which I want to try with my students first, I may put that flame thrower target thread off until at least the beginning of the season.

To stay on tdk6's topic in this thread, maybe limit your comments re my thoughts to post # 34 here?

Tim, the first beer is on mee. JASP the bigger wide range movements doesnt have to be jerky. Usually the students movements are subtle.

Tim, I am not suggesting a pissing contest here. Nor is anyone flaming out about any of this. You solicited my posting of a sample progression and it includes a thought process that sets up the students for success by avoiding some of what we have done in the past and in that some of the good turn / bad turn stuff in the beginner corral is avoided purposely. Beginners are especially prone to take an idea too literally. Their first impressions are of particular concern because we can instill the impression that balancing on the skis using excessive moves is how we should ski. A seasoned skier will almost automatically understand excess as excess  but newbies lack that experience. So even though Witherall wrote about exaggerated stances you need to remember the skis in use in 1993 are vastly different from those in use today. I am not going to review all of those changes here but I will say emphatically that today's skis are so much more responsive than those long straight skis from that era. Many of us discovered very quickly how much more responsive they are when we took our first few runs on these new skis. Adjusting to these more responsive skis meant eliminating many of the excessively strong movements needed to get the same response from those older ski designs. It's a trend that continues today. Rocker and lower swing weights in the tip and tail increase maneuverability even more and they represent the latest in that long line of ski design changes. Considering all of that adjusting to the more responsive skis, our teaching must be adjusted accordingly. It only makes sense to let those exaggerated and excessive movements stay in the past. We can occasionally roll them out if we feel they are needed but to base your whole teaching practices on them is where we would part company. I suspect we will see some of those moves at the trainer and advanced accreditation and examiner levels , if only for the reason that it helps explain current thinking. Evolution verses revolution if you will.

BTW, I am quite capable of teaching an Arlberg beginner progression from the late 1940's but why would I do that on a regular basis? Same goes for what I was taught to teach in the 1990's. Skiing and ski teaching have evolved so far since then. Even PSIA recognized the need for update clinics and this explains why they are now mandating them. Congruency and standardization across divisions and within member schools based on PSIA's current organizational philosophy is their goal. We will see twenty years from now if it did any good. Like everything else it's not the first time they tried to do this sort of thing.

To return to the thread topic of parallel first progressions that is a bit of a misnomer since diverging and converging skis are still used in most of those progressions. The original video has long ago been lost in the discussion. Rightfully so IMO. The rest of this amounts to some basic philosophical differences and that may not ever be settled. I've given reasonable proof why past methods have gone the way of the Arlberg turn and Christiana turns. I don't expect that to change everyone's opinions or teaching habits. I'll leave that to their SSD's and divisional clinicians.

TDK, beginners lack the refined movements of better skiers. Same can be said for their balancing skills that are in comparison rudimentary. That changes with experience but we simply cannot assume they own that more refined set of balancing skills right out of the door. If anything we must assume the opposite. At least until they prove otherwise. Gotta run some errands now but PM me if you want to discuss this further, JASP.

JASP, no pissing matches here. I respect to your opinion.

Thanks Tim we can disagree and still respect each other's opinions. I may sound a bit paternal at times but like the generation before mine some of that is a bit natural. My mentors understood me as a skeptic at times but they also knew I would give their ideas my full consideration. Not all of their ideas, or mine for that matter, are the final word on any subject but in this case prevailing opinions line up to support what I wrote about accuracy and efficacy in our demonstrations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

TDK, beginners lack the refined movements of better skiers. Same can be said for their balancing skills that are in comparison rudimentary. That changes with experience but we simply cannot assume they own that more refined set of balancing skills right out of the door. If anything we must assume the opposite. At least until they prove otherwise. Gotta run some errands now but PM me if you want to discuss this further, JASP.

But why teach refined movements to beginners?
Really? Think about what you just asked TDK. Perhaps we need to review where most of these folks start. They cannot even stand on the moving skis. So refining their stance just to stay upright is the first step. It seems a bit cruel to then ask them to exaggerate the tipping of the skis considering just standing on the moving skis is still so new and still a challenge. Especially when safer and friendlier methods exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro

Really? Think about what you just asked TDK. Perhaps we need to review where most of these folks start. They cannot even stand on the moving skis. So refining their stance just to stay upright is the first step. It seems a bit cruel to then ask them to exaggerate the tipping of the skis considering just standing on the moving skis is still so new and still a challenge. Especially when safer and friendlier methods exist.

Think about it this way, you need pretty big movements if you want to tip sideways as much as loosing your balance. Especially if you dp it in the correct manner of staying balanced. All these refined movements are for more advanced skiers.

Further refinements are done at every level. They correspond with a growing set of skills but good turn / bad turn activities help the more experienced skier dial in their skiing far more effectively than they could at that first day level where the student has no clue where" just right" would be, or how it should feel. They will gain that through experience but without any experience base that theory falls flat as often as the students attempting to assume those exaggerated stances. We have been around this circle more than a few times TDK. It started when you posted the reverse airplane upper body moves ten years ago. I like some of your ideas but we still seem to have this old subject where we will just have to agree to disagree.

JASP

I like this guy's airplane turns:

If Mr. Miller learned this gross upper body Pressure/Edge movement in his beginning parallel class he has an instructor to thank...

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/30/16 at 3:18pm

O.K. Sarcasm like that requires a bit stronger response.  The fact that we progressively refine movements and maneuvers at every subsequent level does not justify starting with those contrived unbalanced stances and in doing so teach errors before the student owns any other technical knowledge. Teach to a fail if you like but insisting in doing so in any of our schools and most likely you would be unemployed by the end of the day. So do what you do fellas and I'll continue to do what I do, explain it how I explain it, as it is congruent with the authors of our technical manuals, including our Technical Director here at Epic and our training managers & SSDs at all 25 of our schools.

I firmly believe there is no bad movement and in fact I feel it is a valid maneuver at a point subsequent to say level 4 and a maneuver race coaches Like the Mahres feature in their clinics but c'mon first experience parallel first progressions neither need or would benefit the students who have a hard enough time just trying to stand up on two skis.

Uh, oh.  Do we work for the same company?

(I knew it was only a matter of time.)

In any event, I am glad that you recognize sarcasm!

I just got called for dinner, but before you email either PSIA or corporate HQ, please wait for further response...

Edited by Tim Hodgson - 9/30/16 at 9:02pm
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 › ski lesson-parallel ski in one day (the title of the posted YouTube video)