or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › How do i go from snow plow to a complete parallel turn?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How do i go from snow plow to a complete parallel turn?

post #1 of 227
Thread Starter 

@Bob Barnes  Shouldn't there be a third diagram looking like the Matching diagram but with only inside leg steering?

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/145516/how-do-i-go-from-snow-plough-to-a-complete-parallel-turn#post_1980684

 

I don't teach Matching or Closing but Pressure (with Edge) on downhill/outside ski and inside leg steering to parallel in all phases of the turn.


Edited by Tim Hodgson - 10/2/16 at 2:28pm
post #2 of 227

Hey Tim,

 

Try this: @Bob Barnes  — I think you have this capability at 140 posts. The @ and a user name notifies the person whose attention you want.

post #3 of 227

I will let Bob answer you himself but let me just drop a few comments. IMO, what you are doing is Matching. As you can see from the diagram the ski tips of both skis are turning into the turn through out the whole turn. The outside ski while wedging and edged is being pressured from either passive or active weight transfer, or a combination of both, for a smooth turn shape. The inside ski is being steered through the high C until matched with the outside ski and engaged on its LTE.

post #4 of 227

Here's Bob Barnes' diagram that is under discussion, for those

who have not been reading the other thread.  In both cases, the

inside ski is turned to be parallel with the outside ski.

 

Bob Barnes' point is that "matching" on the left is superior to

"closing" on the right.  Matching instead of closing will be required

of ski instructors taking a certification exam.  Matching involves a

focus on moving the inside ski's tip in the direction of the turn

(left turn, move the tip to skier's left).  Closing involves a focus

on moving the inside ski's tail in the opposite direction of the

turn (left turn, move the tail to skier's right).  There is an

assumption that matching is done with the pivot point under

the foot's arch, while closing is done with the pivot point 

in front of the toe piece of the binding. 

 

Bob's diagram shows both skis being manually turned by the skier.  

But the inside ski needs more turning to get it parallel.

 

Beginners skiing in a wedge will not be able to produce this kind

of precision.  But PSIA says that keeping the student's focus on

turing the inside ski's tip in the direction of the turn is superior to

teaching them to do an inside ski heel thrust out and away.

 


Edited by LiquidFeet - 10/2/16 at 3:08pm
post #5 of 227

Why do anything from a wedge?  As soon as new skiers are able to ski comfortably straight on the easiest slope, skis parallel, they can make parallel turns.  Two things are a big help--reasonable physical condition (don't need to be jocks) and their feet are a good fit in the rental boots.  I've taught a lot of skiers in first day all day classes to make simple parallel turns. 

 

Get them started with angulation.  Tip to one side, hand down to the knee, and turn the other way.  Tip the body left, turn right.  Wedge turns are OK here.  Get them started with counter.  Turn the body to the left, turn the skis right.  Get them started with good weight distribution.  Get up on the balls of their feet so (it seems to them) that their jacket zipper pull is over the logo on the outside ski.  Zipper pull over the left ski logo, turn right. 

 

We're doing these upper body movements.  Sliding along without a wedge, have them move the body left as they've learned as they turn their feet right.  They just made a parallel turn.

 

Modern equipment, decently fitting boots, they do not need to make parallel turns from a wedge.  Absolutely avoid teaching anything the student has to un-learn to progress.

post #6 of 227
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoftSnowGuy View Post
 

Why do anything from a wedge?  As soon as new skiers are able to ski comfortably straight on the easiest slope, skis parallel, they can make parallel turns.  Two things are a big help--reasonable physical condition (don't need to be jocks) and their feet are a good fit in the rental boots.  I've taught a lot of skiers in first day all day classes to make simple parallel turns. 

 

Get them started with angulation.  Tip to one side, hand down to the knee, and turn the other way.  Tip the body left, turn right.  Wedge turns are OK here.  Get them started with counter.  Turn the body to the left, turn the skis right.  Get them started with good weight distribution.  Get up on the balls of their feet so (it seems to them) that their jacket zipper pull is over the logo on the outside ski.  Zipper pull over the left ski logo, turn right. 

 

We're doing these upper body movements.  Sliding along without a wedge, have them move the body left as they've learned as they turn their feet right.  They just made a parallel turn.

 

Uh, oh.  You are in big trouble now.  What you are describing in my vernacular is the dreaded (reverse) airplane turn.  Which I use in my beginning parallel class.  And yes if you were to look at the other current thread, below, I also use some Pressure/Edge (but not so much angulation) in my first time beginner class to compensate for the upcoming but unknown to them left-hand compound fall line:

 

http://www.epicski.com/t/147574/ski-lesson-parallel-ski-in-one-day-the-title-of-the-posted-youtube-video/30

 

Read JASP's admonition in the above thread.

 

In my first time beginner class I do matching of the uphill ski - "point it where you want to go" - along with the rotation - "make the wedge of your downhill ski bigger" - and then "let's tip our knee in so we don't end up in the trees on the left." 

post #7 of 227
A wedge is where this needs to start. Why the wedge forms in the first place is an important detail. If you step out a ski as many do in that very first demo, then the student sees a heel thrust first thing. Is it any surprise that they adopt that heel thrust as a first move. Even when doing star turns the lateral step that features turning the foot includes moving the heel out and turning the toes in may lead to a lateral step to create a wedge transition later. So consistency wise we might be who need to rethink showing some of these sort of moves. But what alternatives exist that do not include that pesky heel thrust move to create the wedge? As experienced instructors here that question should not be all that difficult to answer and if you have to struggle to come up with those alternatives, well maybe it points out how stuck in a habitual progression rut you are. I know that sounds a bit in your face, it's not really, it's only my attempt to get you thinking outside of that rut that so many find themselves in. Myself I try not to stay in these ruts but let's face it we all have them and by rethinking why we adopted these habitual actions in the first place we might be able to look beyond them and see other just as viable options. In some cases the scripted progressions we learned as a newbie instructor are a clue to this and might identify the philosphical bias of the training staff and SAM. Straying too far from their directives is going to create friction between you and them and as your employer they might ask you to just follow their methods. If that includes a stepped wedge somewhere along the way that would explain how we create a wedged stance in the first place. But other reasons are usually involved and identifying them might make this wedge to parallel discussion more valuable.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/4/16 at 7:30am
post #8 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

But what alternatives exist that do not include that pesky heel thrust move to create the wedge? As experienced instructors here that question should not be all that difficult to answer and if you have to struggle to come up with those alternatives,...

I'm not an instructor, but I am curious. JASP, what alternatives to create a wedge do you have in mind?

I can create a wedge by standing with skis parallel in a slow straight run, tip both skis simultaneously to little toe edges so that the left ski tracks left and the right ski tracks right. Once skis are far enough apart, tip both skis to big toe edge(this kind of happens automatically), skis track in, and now tips move toward one another. Now I need to let both inside edges stop tracking(release both inside edges) so that the tips don't cross. I'm now in a wedge without pushing out my heel or stepping into a wedge. Unfortunately, I don't know how useful this would be for a new skier. If a beginner were able to do this, then it seems that they should just skip the wedge altogether.
post #9 of 227

A few things to consider...

...first and foremost the wedge maneuver needs clarification. Tracking skis suggests to me a carving focus and a wedge maneuver is performed on partially engaged edges. Some slipping is prescribed. I will detail the alternative in a bit but I am hoping someone else shares it before I do that. Maybe I will PM you the answer if you hang onto it for a bit while others share more ideas.


Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/4/16 at 9:44pm
post #10 of 227

Assuming you are turning from a traverse down hill you could just allow your skis to both turn down hill while the uphill ski being more on edge due to natural geometry turns more than the other.

post #11 of 227

Thanks Ghost, I would add the center seeking effect of Gravity to the top of the turn and how even without an engaged edge it will pull us into the next turn. Yes the terrain of choice is very shallow but the net resultant force of support under both skis and Gravity is still slightly off vertical. Meaning the net force we still call Gravity pulls us down the hill even there. The secret is in reducing the edge that is supporting us and causing the traverse in the first place. I pulled out my 1964 manual and the 2007 certification guide from PSIA and noticed the big difference in how the maneuver is described in each. I will offer a small portion of both texts but since both are in hard copy form transcribing both here is a large task I am not going to take on right now. The 2007 guide was available at PSIA's site but Bob may be the person who can post that since he is the author and there are copyrights that may apply.

 

The 1964 version includes an uphill stem (or bilateral hopping stems if doing a wedge straight run) to get the skis into a converging position. From there the skier tips the shoulders to the outside of the turn to weight the outside ski. The outside shoulder is held back to create upper body counter. On the equipment of that era those moves seemed reasonable and were in large part an offshoot of the Austrian Arlberg system. Instructors who trained back then adopted this final form and if they did not change what was once the standard it would still be correct by that dated standard. The additional weight placed on the uphill ski would indeed increase reaction force under that ski and that in effect would push us into the new turn. A particular note missing in that manual was the reduction of edge angle of the downhill ski though and in effect this introduces vaulting to overwhelm the edge platform under the downhill ski.

 

Contrast that fairly simple and straight forward description with what Barnes and the PSIA Alpine Education Committee wrote in the 2007 certification guidelines that are three pages long. Of particular relevance I am including some overall qualities as they describe them followed by some maneuver specific descriptions of the basic maneuver and finally a few of the disqualifiers that I feel are of particular relevance to this discussion. Hopefully this doesn't get too verbose but here they are...

 

Stance is described in the commonalities & principles of all basic reference standard maneuvers as follows;

"Open, uncontrived, functional, and athletic, optimizing movement options, independent leg action, and muscular and skeletal efficiency.

 

The maneuver specific description includes all the basic fundamental principles of basic offensive turns at the beginning level.

  • Movements, speed, and line are reasonably attainable by a typical beginning skier...
  • Range and intensity of movements are appropriately minimal, reflecting the very low speed, very gentle terrain, and embryonic skill development of the beginning skier...
  • Consistent natural wedge is the outcome of the open stance, active steering movements, and tactics that keep speed and forces to a minimum...
  • It is a characteristic, not a principle, and outcome, not an intent, and certainly not a defensive braking move. The wedge is not forced!...
  • Skier demonstrates exclusively "positive movements"- when turning right nothing moves intentionally left. The uphill tail is not pushed out at turn initiation and the wedge does not open wider...
  • Gliding wedge is constant and natural, unforced, with no change in size. Skis stay on opposing edges as the skier's body remains consistently between the skis....

 

Disqualifiers, or at least some of them are as follows;

  • stance - ineffective, contrived, or severely misaligned to the extent that it interferes with the required technical or tactical elements.
​Rotary
  • Consistent or dominant upper body or pushoff-based rotary mechanics. these include rotation and rotary pushoff, counter rotation, and a blocking pole plant.
  • Sequential (outside leg first) movement, or any leg movements that twist the outside tail into an increased skid during initiation or shaping phase of the turn.

​Edging

  • ​Failurwe to release edge of downhill ski at turn initiation; "pushoff" initiation.
  • Braking, intentional skidding, pushing to edge, checking, platforms.
  • ​insufficient engagement, causing slippage and loss of steering control.
  • Excessive engagement, causing edge lock and loss of steering control.

Pressure control

  • ​Active weight transfer, especially if it causes a negative movement of the body (cm) through transition (ie, pushoff)
  • ​Forward leverage causing the tails to wash, or otherwise interfere with steering efforts
  • loss of speed control, or speed control from braking

 

So there you have some of the more recent thinking about wedges which also apply to an extent to Wedge Christies (matching being an obvious difference).

BTW the wedge and matching is described as spontaneous and in the case of the wedge Christie they include the following

  • Matching also resulting from continued steering of the inside tip into the turn. Speed and pitch of the hill dictate the ti,ing and rate of matching.

 

When we get to parallel turns the obvious difference is corresponding edge usage clearly seen in somewhat equal edge angles of both skis at all times, a slightly narrower stance than the wedge Christie (reflects a student's improved balance and confidence), simultaneous edge release from reducing edge angles, consistently parallel skis as a result of refined active steering movements and appropriate tactics, and a lack of any contrived stances and negative movements (moving any part of the body away from the turn).

 

Beyond that lies a whole lot of activities and experimentation where the student may indeed assume contrived stances to discover their effects on the outcome and learn how to recognize when their stance gets out of the basic balance zone, as well as how to correct those common errors. But all of that is a topic for another day and another thread. Wedge to parallel is a journey where we establish some basic fundamentals in an easily digestible and usable form and then go about refining those movements as the student's skill level improves. Inside ski usage certainly changes but not as a function of anything more than speed. Try to perform basic parallel turns at a snails pace and you will wedge, or wedge Christie if you up the speed a slight bit. I am sure some here will refute some, or all of what I included here but in doing so I hope they provide just as much detail from their national organization that published that information. Please also include date of publishing because like PSIA sometimes that date is a factor in what was written.

post #12 of 227

Hopefully Tim this explains why I counselled you to rethink the reverse airplane shoulder move in another thread. It also should point you toward understanding why equipment changes have relegated much of the Arlberg inspired stuff to it's historically correct place in time when the skis and boot were so much less responsive and our movements simply had to be that big. I need to run but thanks for starting this thread and continuing the process of exploring all the nuances of ski teaching.

JASP

post #13 of 227

Pulling the new inside ski slightly back (but not the upper body above it), relative to the new outside ski, will produce a simultaneous turn entry for a parallel skidded turn at a snail's pace on almost-flat terrain.  No stem, no wedge.  That's because the LTE (little toe edge) of the shovel on the pulled-back ski will grip the snow, causing a turn with both skis skidding. 

 

For carved parallel turn entries with no stem, no wedge, at a snail's pace on almost-flat terrain, just tip them together.  

 

However, in any turn, If one edges or rotates the new outside ski first to get it to start the turn, there will be a stem/wedge entry.


Edited by LiquidFeet - 10/7/16 at 8:04pm
post #14 of 227
Actually LF, both moves are disqualifiers according to the movement descriptors. No levering onto the tip using a pull back, or sequential edge changes. Having worked with folks with amazing eyes for detail I can tell you they see pretty much every detail. Some were world cup stars and coaches, one an 8 time world extreme champ, others wrote our training manuals and served on many national demo teams. So fooling their collective eyes is unlikely. Trust me I' ve tried more than a few times.
BTW, Barnes is especially famous for mentioning this focus for passing the wedge christie to cert candidates. So releasing the uphill edges simultaneously certainly would eliminate a wedge at transition but subsequent to that (due to the leg steering that must be present) is when the wedge appears.

As far as a carved parallel turn, again it is a disqalifier. The maneuver is a blended maneuver at that beginner level.
Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/7/16 at 8:50pm
post #15 of 227

Thanks JASP for the info on the PSIA 2007 manual. I have several objections of which most of you are aware of. Maybe the biggest objection I have is regarding positive and negative movements. IMO if some part of your body moves in the opposite direction of where you are going to turn its not a negative movement. If this was true then the take back on a tennis racket or a golf club would be a negative movement since the ball is supposed to fly in the opposite direction.

 

One of the biggest challenges for beginners is that when they ski they should let their skis lie flat on the snow. This is not intuitive since they have learned to always move their feet if they want to go somewhere. So the try to step and walk and stuff. This is the reason I like the old Arlberg system. It teaches you from the very beginning to not move your legs and feet. They stay put. Only work with balancing movements, pressure and friction. Also, how you form the wedge position is IMO overrated. From a relatively close stance you need to push your heels out in order to get a better spread. Only twisting your feet will not be sufficient if you are not in a very wide stance to begin with or you only want a very narrow wedge. The most important thing would IMO be that you should be careful at instructing a pivot under foot since you don't want that when carving.

 

No matter how I look at it I cant really find any good reasons to abandon the Arlberg system. Yes, the equipment has changed but that only means that we need more subtle movements. And I'm still of the opinion that many instructors back in the 80s and onward never knew how to turn according to the Arlberg system in the first place. Or wanted a change just for a change.

 

Could some one link us to the PSIA demo videos that appeared in some other thread earlier this fall. I cant find them.

post #16 of 227

Check this treasure trove out on Vimeo:

https://vimeo.com/search?q=PSIA+RM

post #17 of 227
With all respect I think Arlberg wedge to parallel progressions are archaic. Perfect the wedge before trying a stem christaina. Perfect that before moving on to parallel christianas.


Edited by justanotherskipro - 10/10/16 at 6:42am
post #18 of 227
post #19 of 227
As far as the counter rotation and squatting (wind up) then quickly rising while throwing our torso into the new turn, the purpose was to get the skis rotated into the new turn. Put on leathers and a pair of 240s with long thongs and that makes more sense. Beyond that circumstance I do not see "back swing" counter rotary making much sence in modern skiing. Interestingly enough the shoulder tilting away from the turn is called an error in that system. Has been for 70 years.
If that turns your fancy TDK, great. We will have to disagree about Arlberg methods and techniques.
post #20 of 227

My oldest manual is from 1957, the 6th edition of the Austrian ski-instruction manual (Österreichischer Schi-Lehrplan / Kruckenhauser). Your book must be much older. The only really big difference between modern skiing and Kruckenhauser in that book is the close stance the use of Counter Rotation. He starts both the Wedge- and the Stem Turn with very aggressive Counter Rotation which he holds on to through out the whole turn. However, as he moves on to the Parallel Turn the CR at the start of the turn is gone and the perfection is to die for. Absolutely stunning. Kruckenhauser was also an awarded photographer by Leica. Clearest and best images of ski technique I have ever seen.

 

Back then ski technique was taught differently than today. There was no need to hurry past the wedging and stemming phases only to ski parallel as soon as possible. As far as turns, you had 3 different types: wedge, stem and parallel. The parallel was then split into long and short radius turns. There it ended. Crud, powder, threes, backcountry and bumps you ask? Well, back then there was nothing else. Heck, at some point they didn't even have the lifts. There was another thread of the most important inventions in skiing. The lift must have been the most important one.

post #21 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanotherskipro View Post

As far as the counter rotation and squatting (wind up) then quickly rising while throwing our torso into the new turn, the purpose was to get the skis rotated into the new turn. Put on leathers and a pair of 240s with long thongs and that makes more sense. Beyond that circumstance I do not see "back swing" counter rotary making much sence in modern skiing. Interestingly enough the shoulder tilting away from the turn is called an error in that system. Has been for 70 years.
If that turns your fancy TDK, great. We will have to disagree about Arlberg methods and techniques.

 

Well, that manual you are referring to is truly dated. This is what I am referring to when I say that most people that are saying the technique was completely wrong back then really have no clue as to what they are saying. To back their claims they then pull out a manual from the 20s. Yes, sure its dated. If you look at the cave paintings of skiing 2000 years BC its even more dated. No offence.

post #22 of 227
Uh, Iselin's book is a good example of Schnieders work. 1947 is the first published date. Interestingly enough PSIA's first manual in1964 was also based on the Arlberg method and it is similar with the exception of the huge wind ups. Torso tilting to effect an active foot to foot weight transfer and pulling the outside shoulder back are still present at that point as a means of directing pressure to the outside ski and creating countered stances. Not exactly what they promote now days but I will get into why in a moment. As far as how the Arlberg method has morphed over the past six decades I will leave that to you (TDK) to bring us up to date since my Arlberg library stops with the 1964 PSIA version of it. I for one would be interested in seeing you write an article and post it here detailing those changes. I was not around for the change in philosophy at the PSIA but for them to shift away from the Arlberg method must have happened as a result of a paradigm shift of enormous magnitude. An event of this magnitude obviously occurred within PSIA when they began considering what Joubert wrote about extensively in the late sixties. Killy and his French team proved his methods and philosophy had merit and this obviously had quite an impact since Joubert's influence is still observable in PSIA's latest publications.
.
With that I am going to return to the subject at hand and the scope of which needs some clarification. I am going to suggest we refrain from discussing higher end parallel turns for now since the learning pathway from wedge to parallel is of particular interest and it starts at the very beginning where the Arlberg method always promoted heel pushes to create their wedged stance. I assume since stems were mentioned by you that they still exist as that in between step between wedge and parallel. Contrast that with the steering of the feet featured in the current PSIA manuals and we see a very important and distinct difference. Stems and stepped abduction of the foot to create tail separation are absent, as are the tilting of the torso moves prevalent so many years ago. The legs and ultimately the feet are internally rotated and the foot to foot separation remains constant but the tails and tips still assume the converging relationship we call a wedged stance but not through a pressure control move like a step, or heel thrust / push.
As we move past that initial wedge creation stage we encounter the Wedge Christie which is not the same as the Stem Christie for the reasons I just mentioned. Weight shifting foot to foot is a passive outcome that is a function of what some might call centrifugal force but I would call it the body trying to go straight as the skis engage and try to turn us. (Think ball in a car wanting to go straight as the car turns) This is important because pressure and friction underfoot effect the skis response to our steering inputs (increases the skis resistance to our steering efforts as pressure increases) and that passive weight shift makes it a progressive outside ski loading event. So many things occur, the inside ski is bearing less weight and the constant steering effort has a greater effect. Secondly the outside ski is bearing more weight and this increases it's resistance to our steering efforts slowing it's turning rate. Third there is no need to tilt the torso since the naturally occurring forces take our weigh their anyway. Matching is a natural consequence of this since the inside ski turning faster and the outside ski turning slower would eliminate the wedged stance.

In conclusion I say wedges occurring mid turn are the result of low speed and how the forces involved effect weight which directly effects how quickly a ski turns. Wedges at transition occur as a result of a sequential release or the all too common partial release of the uphill edge of the downhill ski. In effect this is returning to an opposing edge stance momentarily. I've heard this described as not trusting the new edge platform and hanging onto the old edge platform just in case. In any event the path from wedge to parallel is often a matter of trust and a bit more speed than a beginner uses in their wedges. BTW, Spontaneous Christies is a term for this naturally occurring outcome. Over time skiers will add things like an early active weight transfer to the uphill ski , or a white pass rolling of the downhill ski to the mix. Neither are out of bounds per say but they are specialized moves for a very specific intended outcome that is still beyond the beginners that are the focus of this thread.
post #23 of 227

JASP - I could not tell you how the Arlberg system developed since I only have the book from 1957. The photos you showed of a heavily rotated upper body into the turn is mentioned as wrong with a picture. Not sure how it was back in 1947 but that evidently changed completely. Or then it was a translation mistake when translated into English. Ott would probably know....

 

I don’t think the Stem Christie really exists. Maybe in Austria. By our association it was replaced with the Wedge Christie by the late 80’s or the early 90’s but we have never been a leading nation in ski instruction. The key difference between the WC and the SC is how you form that wedge at the start of the turn. In the SC the uphill ski displaced out to form a wedge while in the WC both skis were displaced equal amount out to form the wedge. Don’t get hung up by the word “push”. However, the tails of the skis were pushed out back in the 1957 manual due to two reasons. The stance was feet glued together and the long skis. Tails had to be pushed out. Later when skis shortened and stance widened it was possible to pivot the skis into a wedge or a stem more from under your toes than by the tip of your skis. Also the words “steer” and “rotate” have been used to describe this “modern” move.

 

Anyway, what I never liked about the WC is the fact that as you come across the hill in a knees bent parallel traverse with your weight forward and slightly over your edged downhill ski, angulating at the hip, tipping your knees uphill and with a slight bit of upper body counter…. pushing out that weighted downhill ski would not be a natural thing to do. It feels completely wrong. If you were stemming instead you could stay in that solid well balanced position with your weight on your downhill ski until shifting your weight out over the wedging uphill ski. To overcome this problem the inside ski needs to be tipped off it’s edge at the same time the outside ski is pivoted into the fall line. To make this move easier momentum is taken from the upper body. If you look at the PSIA demos you can see that they stay completely square to the skis all the time. Same thing with anybody making a demo of the modern WC. This type of WC turn initiation builds on the theory that when the downhill ski is released from its edge, your ski tips will seek the fall line. Also, your outside ski needs to trawl longer to keep up with the inside ski so it needs to be speeded up. One slightly altered application of the WC would be the one where you extend up on straight legs at turn initiation. When you do this your edges flatten out and release and off in the fall line you go. In the SC there is necessarily no “stepping” of either ski. The uphill ski is slid out, not stepped out. Same with the new inside ski. It is similar to the WC. Both skis can and should be kept on the snow.

 

The passive weight transfer WC involves some very advanced moves for a beginner. Particularly since there are no visual cues. Other than being totally square to the skis.

 

If you look closely at the PSIA demos you will find that as they match the inside to the outside ski there is quite a bit of increased skidding and tail wash taking place. It comes from the weight transfer that suddenly increases. This is because at the initiation there is no weight transfer. The weight remains over the released downhill ski. It is evened out when they reach the fall line. From here on the passive weight transfer kicks in and causes the tail wash. If you compare to active weight transfer demos it’s different. It’s because as you transfer your weight out over the uphill ski you get it engaged much earlier, in the high C before the fall line. The turn radius becomes much more even and also much shorter. This on both on Wedge Turns, Stem Christies and Parallel Turns.

post #24 of 227
Jasp's photos look more like the French approach to Christiana turns. In that era, the French system involved a significant effort to launch the body into the turn to help release/pivot the skis toward the turn.
post #25 of 227

Hey TDK, the stem christie is still a possible task for PSIA Certification exams, although it's not often talked about or taught.

 

I had an Examiner use it in training once as part of a progression, it was a helpful task for putting your focus on engaging the new ski early (very early in the case of a stem christie, as you actually step up to what will be the new outside ski.)

post #26 of 227

Stem Christies will get your lower intermediate students through the bumps upright and proud.  This type of turn is quite useful if you take your class around a corner to the perfect trail for practicing what you've been working on, and unexpectedly see it completely bumped up.  I've done this and had great success.  They enjoyed it, actually.  I explained that another day, after they got a bit more practice working on the other stuff we'd been addressing, I'd be happy to show them the REAL way to ski a bump run.  

post #27 of 227

Kneale, Iselin is Swiss by birth and taught all over Europe and the US. In his own words he talk about innovations and alternate versions existing but his strong feeling was that the "Classical Arlberg method" was still the best method and the basis for the book I mentioned. Not knowing him personally I can only assume his book follows that method as he understood it.

 

SMJ, RPO moves and step / stem christies as an alternate to a Wedge Christie is a bit curious but examiners often have alternative maneuvers to choose from when conditions dictate a safer option is needed. That being said my copy of the recently published national standards have no mention stem christies. Probably because they feature a whole lot of movements contrary to current philosophy of flow and positive moves.

 

LF, I am not sure I would make step and stem christies a focus in beginning moguls but considering the goal of getting an over terrained class out of that situation is the primary concern, whatever you used seems to have worked. Not sure what else to say about that but maybe detailing why you feel it worked so well might be a good subject for a new thread.

post #28 of 227
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkiMangoJazz View Post
 

Hey TDK, the stem christie is still a possible task for PSIA Certification exams, although it's not often talked about or taught.

 

I had an Examiner use it in training once as part of a progression, it was a helpful task for putting your focus on engaging the new ski early (very early in the case of a stem christie, as you actually step up to what will be the new outside ski.)

 

It is indeed a very useful technique of teaching early outside ski pressure. Also, its great in making a distinct separation between wedging and parallel skiing. By using the Wedge Christie you run the risk of being stuck with a permanent micro wedge. It will always try to appear when you get out of your comfort zone or when you are skiing too slow. 

post #29 of 227
Thread Starter 

Hey LiquidFeet:  Is this a Stem Christie which Jonny Moseley is teaching in the bumps?

 

 

 

 

 

This is what Bob Barnes says is a Stem Christie, it can be either an upstem with the uphill ski or a downstem with the downhill ski.  Is that correct?

 

"Stem Christie
classic turn initiated with converging skis—the "stem phase"—followed by a “christie phase” of parallel skis on corresponding edges. The stem can be either an "upstem"—pushing the tail of the uphill (new outside) ski out to a skidded turn entry as the downhill ski holds its edge—or a "downstem," in which the downhill ski tail twists downhill at the end of the turn until its edge engages, allowing a "pushoff" of the uphill ski and body uphill and into a skidded turn entry."

post #30 of 227

Tim, we were doing upstems, Bob's first definition.

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 › How do i go from snow plow to a complete parallel turn?