EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › Canadian Ski Site BigE posted
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Canadian Ski Site BigE posted

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
Interesting videos to review:

http://www.snowproab.com/resources/index.htm

ok - tell me if I'm nuts, but looking at all three videos I see the same style of skiing:

1. up-unweighting at turn transition to allow a quick pivot
2. cross under rather than cross over
3. not carving upper part of turns but strong pivot and tail skids along with the up-unweighting at transition

In my own skiing I:

1. Keep the upper body still. I don't bob up and down. My legs extend outward in the turn and then flex in the middle at transition so that my skis stay on the snow and the top of the turn can be carved. By being short in leg length at transition and extending as the turn develops, my body height above the snow stays constant. In the videos there I see what looks to me like the older up-unweighting and strong pivot style of skiing that was needed with non-shaped skis.
2. I cross over my skis as they pass the fall line while I am committing to the next turn, basically continuing down the hill. In these videos the skiers legs are crossing under them rather than there bodies crossing over the skis.

Am I seeing this correctly?
post #2 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
Interesting videos to review:

http://www.snowproab.com/resources/index.htm

ok - tell me if I'm nuts, but looking at all three videos I see the same style of skiing:

1. up-unweighting at turn transition to allow a quick pivot
Most of the skiers I saw in that film demonstrated that technique. Its not a bad technique. Its not the best, IMO. These people seem to need shorter skis or something. They make short/medium radius turns, but don't seem to have the appropriate skis to do so.
Quote:
2. cross under rather than cross over
Read the thread, still confused as to exactly what that refers to.

Either way, your CoM has to go over your skis at some point, as someone correctly pointed out in that thread.

Perhaps "cross-under" means absorbing the rebound of the ski through flexion and then extending as the new edge is set? Thats how racers tend to do it in the flats.

Does "cross-over" refer to not absorbing the rising pressure on both skis as gravity is added to the turn...as the skis swing across the fall line? So the new edge change is accomplished by "moving-to" the appropriate new-edge position without taking pressure off the skis?

Oh so confused...sorry, didn't mean to hijack.
Quote:
3. not carving upper part of turns but strong pivot and tail skids along with the up-unweighting at transition
I think these people need to drop 10 centimeters off their skis.

Also, I saw maybe three turns completed with any sort of agression in those demo films. Is there something in PSIA/CSIA that says "One must not achieve an edge angle over 30 degrees" or something? It seems these people ski in constant mediocrity mode. They don't want to really work a turn, it seems, even on the steeper terrain.

If these people make short/medium turns all day, why not ski on good SL skis or something like it?
Quote:
In my own skiing I:

1. Keep the upper body still. I don't bob up and down. My legs extend outward in the turn and then flex in the middle at transition so that my skis stay on the snow and the top of the turn can be carved. By being short in leg length at transition and extending as the turn develops, my body height above the snow stays constant. In the videos there I see what looks to me like the older up-unweighting and strong pivot style of skiing that was needed with non-shaped skis.
The pivot is what really piqued my interest.

Attempting to keep your body completely still above the terrain is counterproductive, IMO. When large edge angles are produced, you naturally get closer to the snow. You have to extend upwards in the middle of the turn, lest your knees bump you in the chin. The extension upwards is needed to keep the mass centered on the ski, then driving forward into the next rurn.

So in my slalom turns, my legs are at their maximum capacity. I generate the biggest angles I can, then as the skis come around through the fall line, they literally start to lever my whole upper body vertically as the edge angle decreases.

I can't think of any good way to avoid that, other than riding the tails of the skis through the center of the turn. That, btw, is exactly what the really fast SL skiers do when they can "get away with it".

Quote:
2. I cross over my skis as they pass the fall line while I am committing to the next turn, basically continuing down the hill. In these videos the skiers legs are crossing under them rather than there bodies crossing over the skis.
Confused by this.

When my skis (angularly) pass the fall line, they are offset to the right or left of my body, headed straight down the hill.

How much I finish my turn delineates exactly when my CoM goes back "over" the skis. The more "across the hill" the turn, the longer this is delayed.

How can there be a difference between your legs crossing under you, and your body crossing over your legs? I'm probably just too thick to get it...if anyone has any videos showing the differences I'd be much obliged.
Quote:
Am I seeing this correctly?
You nailed the up-unweighting and pivoting. These people look like they are working too hard and not having enough fun.
-Garrett
post #3 of 29
Thread Starter 

Cross Over vs Cross Under

This is easy to show, not so easy to describe. I'll make a stab at what I'm referring to when I use those terms.

If you want, when you ski, you can up-unweight and then bring your legs over and under your CM and set your skis back down in the new direction. This - cross under move, basically skips the whole normal part of the upper part of a smoothly carved turn.

In cross over, as you are ending the one turn, your body is uphill from the skis. Depending on how you use terms, as you release into the new turn, ie - remove your base of support from your ending turns down hill ski, your CM will cross over the skies while the skis cross the fall line. The carve and direction of the skis is smoothly continued. As your body moves across your skis, your skis will smoothly hook up into the new turn (in time to catch your body that is basically falling down the hill).

Visually - in movement analysis, if the turns go smoothly from one C shape to the next, you'll see the skier is using Cross Over. A cross under style gives a Z shape to the turns as the skis are flicked into their turns creating abrupt changes in direction.

This is my own personal way I use and think of the terms.

Now, I'll just pop in Bob Barnes great little sking dictionary and see if they are described in there!

(is the new one gonna be availble as both CD and book? I personally prefer the CD as it's easier to find things)
post #4 of 29
Thank you. That is the most accessible description I've read yet.

So I guess every skier needs both cross-under and cross-over in their stable of techniques. Sometimes you have to "cut off" the top part of the C, and sometimes you really want the flow from turn to turn to be as efficient and fluid as possible.

Is it possible those Canadian vids are really old?
post #5 of 29
Boy, you two must be some wonder skiers if you ski better than the Canadian team. Carving the top of your turn when you don't have to is just wasting energy, try slipping the first half, or maybe even the whole turn, and only set your edges at the very end to get a good rebound bounce, oh what fun that is.

....Ott
post #6 of 29
Thread Starter 

Ok - checked the dictionary

In Bob's dictionary he equates the two. I don't. In fact, I think a lot of people don't. In the strict sense the body always crosses over the skis. In this fashion Bob equates the 2 terms.

In cross under, the skis are pivoted into their turns and abruptly change directions. So, relatively speaking the legs are being flung in some fashion or stepped or stemmed into the new turn. The focus is on a bring the legs under you body to a new direction - thus Cross Under. If you do a track analysis of the ski's path after a couple of these turns you'll see very abrupt changes in direction in the tracks.

In cross over, the body is going it's direction and the skis are going their direction smoothly. There is no abrupt change of direction of the skis or the bodies CM. At the junction of the fall line, the CM line and the ski line are both nearly straight but not in the same direction. Thus the more gentle and smooth "Cross Over" style of turn. The body crosses smoothly over the skis vs the skis being forcibly brought under the body from one side to the other using the large CM as a fulcrum with the legs and skis forming the pendulum. Thus the term Cross Over vs Cross Under.

They are not the same.

Of course, sometimes a Cross Under turn is desired as in changing directions and jumping a rock in the trail - for instance (or a fallen snowboarder). But in normal modern carved skiing you would normally select Cross Over from the quiver of ways to turn. (at least that's my preference)
post #7 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott Gangl
Boy, you two must be some wonder skiers if you ski better than the Canadian team. Carving the top of your turn when you don't have to is just wasting energy, try slipping the first half, or maybe even the whole turn, and only set your edges at the very end to get a good rebound bounce, oh what fun that is.

....Ott
Did you watch those videos?

Maybe those people are "dumbing down" their skiing for the purpose of showing the standard... Those are some pretty weak-sauce skiin' moves.

I'm not talking about the dressed up demo skiers. There wasn't any meaningful representation of their skiing. I'm talking about the example skiers that were shown.

How on earth is pussyfooting around the hill "fun"? If I wanted to slide through my turns, I'd do it in the woods. If I'm going out on a nice smooth racetrack like those dudes were skiing on, I'm going to get my skis out from under my ass and make some damn turns.

I mean, cameras on and everything! Lets see some skis move! Lets see someone go too far, boot out, recover! Excitement! Perhaps I'm just young and dumb.

That skiing looks like
-boring
-each turn is very similar to the last, regardless of what the hill is doing
-not very "powerful"
-not very much of a workout. I could ski all day like that. I can go out on real slalom skis and destroy my legs in a few good runs.
-Garrett
post #8 of 29
Thread Starter 

Ott - it's easy to carve the top

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott Gangl
Boy, you two must be some wonder skiers if you ski better than the Canadian team. Carving the top of your turn when you don't have to is just wasting energy, try slipping the first half, or maybe even the whole turn, and only set your edges at the very end to get a good rebound bounce, oh what fun that is.

....Ott
Ott - if the Canadian Instructor Team wants to ski that way - that's their business. I was just surprised at what I saw as it looked like 60's style sking.

But, it's actually easy to carve the top of the turn. Just a question, have you every tried the Super Phantom style of release? It'll get the tops of those turns carved and is one of the very easiest ways to change directions. It's very efficient. Carving actually gets you the most distance and speed for the least amount of effort compared to any other style of turn. I'm not sure where your coming from. When you "slip" the top half of the turn - like PMTS's first taught release (the two footed release)- if the terrain is not well groomed or your in crud it can take a lot of energy to maintain balance. I'd much rather SP the release and maintain balance with less disruptions. That's more efficient in my short experience. You can show me what you mean later at HV.

But - more on topic - what is your understanding of Cross Over vs Cross Under? Do you see a difference?
post #9 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
In Bob's dictionary he equates the two. I don't. In fact, I think a lot of people don't. In the strict sense the body always crosses over the skis. In this fashion Bob equates the 2 terms.

In cross under, the skis are pivoted into their turns and abruptly change directions. So, relatively speaking the legs are being flung in some fashion or stepped or stemmed into the new turn. The focus is on a bring the legs under you body to a new direction - thus Cross Under. If you do a track analysis of the ski's path after a couple of these turns you'll see very abrupt changes in direction in the tracks.
Now I seem to really get what you are saying.

I think both techniques get employed throughout the hill, and (i would think) most of the time the turns are some combination of both.
Quote:
At the junction of the fall line, the CM line and the ski line are both nearly straight but not in the same direction. Thus the more gentle and smooth "Cross Over" style of turn. The body crosses smoothly over the skis vs the skis being forcibly brought under the body from one side to the other using the large CM as a fulcrum with the legs and skis forming the pendulum. Thus the term Cross Over vs Cross Under.
When you say the "CM line" and "ski line" do you mean the path that those points are following along the snow? If thats it, I get it. The CM line has a smaller amplitude than the "ski" line, but they are both roughly sinusoidal and roughly in phase.

Quote:
Of course, sometimes a Cross Under turn is desired as in changing directions and jumping a rock in the trail - for instance (or a fallen snowboarder). But in normal modern carved skiing you would normally select Cross Over from the quiver of ways to turn. (at least that's my preference)
Almost always, there is a small amount of instantaneous non curvilnear change in the path of the skis at the top of the turn. It might be small, like a few degrees, but it guarantees that the ski stays weighted even if something unexpected happens....like the hill falls away more than anticipated.

I guess thats what I mean when I say that I usually use a combination of the two terms.

Anyways, Ott has a point. I should probably be spending this time at the squat rack.
-Garrett
post #10 of 29
Thread Starter 

Skiingman - sometimes it's hard to get focus

You'll see that here. If people don't agree with you sometimes they'll make comments that don't really discuss the issue being discussed. My being critical of what I saw at that sight doesn't mean I'm better than the Canadian Instructors in the videos. Ott knows I'm a beginning skier. Sometimes he likes to focus on that rather than adding to the discussion. That's too bad because if you look at Ott's posts you'll see he is one of the most experienced and knowledgable skiers here.

At this point we don't know if Ott likes the style of skiing on the videos or not. All we know is he doesn't like us discussing it.

I would believe that most here would be surprised at the skiing being shown on those videos. I know I was. The surprising part was the site implies this is a goal to strive for in skiing.

Granted, their verbal descriptions of what they were looking for - smooth rounded turns - were good, but that was not shown in the videos.

As a person who recently took on skiing and have gone at it with a passion I think it's very appropriate to see the end results of ski teaching systems and to be aware of the progressions used to get there. It helps to validate or in-validate those systems in terms of selection criteria for the student.
post #11 of 29
Thread Starter 

Not even a few degrees

Quote:
Originally Posted by skiingman
Almost always, there is a small amount of instantaneous non curvilnear change in the path of the skis at the top of the turn. It might be small, like a few degrees, but it guarantees that the ski stays weighted even if something unexpected happens....like the hill falls away more than anticipated.
Try no degrees. I went back and studied the tracks. Later I got to the point where I could follow skiers that do this as they are going down the hill. It's pretty fun to watch or to do track analysis on. Edges jumped the width of the skies with no change of direction in the track analysis. What you are describing is some level of stemming in the turn. Your also correct that most - and that means most - skiers will have at least a few degrees. But not all skiers do this. (unless the snowboarder is in the way)
post #12 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
Try no degrees. I went back and studied the tracks. Later I got to the point where I could follow skiers that do this as they are going down the hill. It's pretty fun to watch or to do track analysis on. Edges jumped the width of the skies with no change of direction in the track analysis. What you are describing is some level of stemming in the turn. Your also correct that most - and that means most - skiers will have at least a few degrees. But not all skiers do this. (unless the snowboarder is in the way)


I usually throw in a couple degrees just for safety's sake. It gives you wiggle room if something goes wrong. Railroad turns are fun though.

If you watch a WC skier, you'll see that the GS skis usually pivot an amount of degrees proportional to how tight the course is for the next one or two turns. Only in the flats do they really cleanly roll from edge to edge.
-Garrett

EDIT: Viewing those videos again, I get the idea that those skiers don't fall very often. What fun is skiing without the occasional mistake?

Their skiing is like taking a Toyota Camry to the racetrack. You can drive it around all day at the limit, make some pretty big mistakes, and never "have an off" as the Brits would say. It always handles safely, and never does anything unexpected. Boring to me.
post #13 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott Gangl
Boy, you two must be some wonder skiers if you ski better than the Canadian team. Carving the top of your turn when you don't have to is just wasting energy, try slipping the first half, or maybe even the whole turn, and only set your edges at the very end to get a good rebound bounce, oh what fun that is.

....Ott
OLD SCHOOL OTT!
post #14 of 29
>>>At this point we don't know if Ott likes the style of skiing on the videos or not. All we know is he doesn't like us discussing it.<<<

John, I watched the videos, and why I brought the Canadian system into the fray is to show you that different systems teach different styles, and that is their style, I have no judgement on it. Try the Italians next.

Old school skiing is wonderful, everyone should be able to do it, where have the tip rolls and gelaendesprung gone? No one even kick turns anymore. For a season or two after breaking my leg in 1970, it was weaker than the other, so I inititated my left turn with up-unweighting and my right turn with down-unweighting. It looked funny but worked great.

John, when I ski with you I'll be 73 years old, bald, overweight and totally out of shape, so we'll se how I do. I've gone from instructor to imtermediate and maybe I'll join you in being a novice.

RR track carvers are great but do not a complete skier make, methinks.

Try some old school skiing!

...Ott
post #15 of 29
Hmm, plenty to agree and disagree with here. Ott, when you carve the top of the turn, it means less pressure at the end of the turn to maintain the same speed. Of course, there comes a point in steepness where carving the top of the turn takes more effort because of the speed involved, and I guess that is the point you were making. John, what this means is that there is a minimum amount of speed that the skis must maintain to get enough pressure to immediately begin carving, and that speed can get to be uncomfortably fast for many people even on a steeper blue slope. Any less speed and the skis will slip a bit before engaging fully ( or you will fall over! ). It's worthwhile playing around with this to get a feel for the minimum speed, since I know you like to explore stuff when you ski. There ARE ways to "juice" the top of the turn so you can carve with less speed, but they present their own problems.

John, if you watch Harb skiing in the expert 2 video, you will see the skis pivoting in between the turns when he is making fall line turns on a steeper section*. He uses mostly cross-under for this, but occasional up-unweighting as well. You are correct the the flexing at the end of the turn puts the leg in a weak position to handle the pressure, but think about using the flexing to absorb that pressure. As you ski steeper slopes, you will begin to really appreciate this, as it allows the skis to keep carving the bottom of the turn. If you maintain a straighter stance ski, the pressure can overwhelm either the edge grip or the snow. The best skiers will precisely control the flexing, so that there is enough left for a cross-under or a clean weighted release. Again, watch Harb on the steeper slopes, he is really good at this.

*Note that the pivoting is a result of unwinding from an anticipated position plus a delayed engagement of the edges.
post #16 of 29
Hey Miles, that's some great insight....Ott
post #17 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott Gangl
>>>At this point we don't know if Ott likes the style of skiing on the videos or not. All we know is he doesn't like us discussing it.<<<

John, I watched the videos, and why I brought the Canadian system into the fray is to show you that different systems teach different styles, and that is their style, I have no judgement on it. Try the Italians next.

Old school skiing is wonderful, everyone should be able to do it, where have the tip rolls and gelaendesprung gone? No one even kick turns anymore. For a season or two after breaking my leg in 1970, it was weaker than the other, so I inititated my left turn with up-unweighting and my right turn with down-unweighting. It looked funny but worked great.

John, when I ski with you I'll be 73 years old, bald, overweight and totally out of shape, so we'll se how I do. I've gone from instructor to imtermediate and maybe I'll join you in being a novice.

RR track carvers are great but do not a complete skier make, methinks.

Try some old school skiing!

...Ott
I was talking about your comment not the video & I did try some old school skiing for about the first 35 years I skied! I am glad we are where we're at!

Over & out!
A-man
post #18 of 29
Right, Atomicman, at least you, like all of us oldtimers,know that we actually could ski quite well with what technology was available to us. Many skiers who learned to ski with the shaped skis think that we were just bobeling along in the olden days because we had to use a lot of 'body language' to make those boards turn.

At least we have the know-how to call upon when needed. In about ten years when all these skis and this technique is outmoded and when skis will have dual edges on each side, one coming out of the sidewall enough so it will engage when the ski is tipped more than 45 degrees and when a simple knob in front of the bindings can be turned to dial in the stiffness of the ski from a soft noodle to a stiff board, and all the other inovations to go along, we will(at least you youngsters will) laugh at all the contorsions we had to go through with our NEW shaped skis.

Time flies and innovations come along at an ever rapid pace, but if you know how to ski, adaptation is a no-brainer.

.....Ott
post #19 of 29
: Ott, you don't have one of those dual edged, knob adjuster skis yet?
post #20 of 29
Shsssss, weems, it's still a secret...Ott
post #21 of 29
Ott,

You make agreat point, and from time to time i do pull out some of that old technique. And your also right, we skied even carved turns and no grooming either, which is huge!
post #22 of 29
Thread Starter 

Come'on Ott

Railroad turns - novice?

You won't wanna ski with me if that's all I do. I wouldn't keep up with you.

Thanks for the compliment though.

MilesB - I'll have to dig out the video and take a look. When I ski with Harold while rotation is occuring I don't see pivoting occuring. But I'm using these terms precisely. That's not to say you can't. Even in the All Mountain book, free foot tipping creates all the tipping and rotation required even if in mid air doing jump turns. (and that's not Harold's book) But, that's not a pivot.

I'll have to ski with you to at Mammoth so you can show my why speed is required to carve the top of the turn. Then I can show you the slow way to carve a nice rounded top of a turn.

But by then the next innovation will have hit and the moterized rotating bindings will change everything. (Ott - I think that will hit before the dual edges do - testing shows the motorized bindings work better)
post #23 of 29
Thread Starter 

I see how you are defining pivoting in this case

Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesB
*Note that the pivoting is a result of unwinding from an anticipated position plus a delayed engagement of the edges.
Re-read and yes - this type of rotation is part and parcel of the first release taught in PMTS (the two footed release) and very useful depending on terrain. This type of pivot is not the active leg steering pivot that is avoided in terms of the PMTS system.

There are three styles of turn taught in PMTS - two footed release, super phantom, and weighted release. Most here from what ever teaching/learning style do releases 1 and 3, but not so many do the 2nd release. That's the one that makes carving the tops of the turns easy. Lito in his book teaches the weigted release as soft weight shift and teaches the super phantom as early weight shift. This early weight shift model of turn is highlighted at the beginning of Eric and Rob DesLauriers book ski the whole mountain.

When you say you can't carve the top of a turn without speed, all things are relative, but that 2nd release style carves it well without needing a lot of speed. Are you talking about this movement pattern when you say speed is required? Are you familar with these 3 authors descriptions of this same move? In talking with other skiers the last two years, this style of turn is not that well known. Even on this board where there are lots of true experts, you'll see a history of posts ridiculing this type of turn as a step uphill or described as a negative movement, which just shows these people are not actually familar with it since there is no negative motion to it at all.
post #24 of 29
>>>>(and that's not Harold's book) <<<

John, there you go spelling your guru's name wrong again...

But then, I had to take him to the woodshed for spelling mine wrong...

....Ott
post #25 of 29
Thread Starter 

Sorry Ottmar

I should just say HH and be safe

your correct - it's Harald (of course, my posts are a bastian of bad speelling)

Do you guys both speak fluent German?
post #26 of 29
John, no matter what mechanism makes it happen, the skis still pivot.
It's really simple physics, for the skis to carve the top of the turn, the body must be downhill of the skis. If you don't have enough forward momentum, you will just fall over, as the skis won't bend into an arc. It doesn't matter what release you use. And the more your turns end across the fall line, the more forward speed you need. If you stay more in the fall line, you don't need much speed to carve the top of the turn (but you will end up going fast!). Note that the actual speed required is not really very high, but on a 40+ degree slope, it's higher than the 97% would feel comfortable with, especially with the terrain irregularities. Think about rolling a bowling ball across a sloped floor. If you just give it a weak push, it will more or less just roll straight downhill. give it a good enough push, and it will make a nice round arc. As you tilt the floor higher, you have to push the ball ever faster to get that round arc. I think that was a Barnes analogy, does that help?
post #27 of 29
Thread Starter 

yep

Thanks MilesB

Yes - that makes sense. You have to have enough speed so that there is inclination going on to counteract ski forces. At the top of the turn, you are at your slowest and fastest as your turn is just past the fall line, then slower again as the turn tightens and transitions.

Like I said, speed is all relative. If you didn't have much momentum going into the top of the turn you'd just have a passive move towards the fall line till speed gained and only the bottom of the turn would be carved. Otherwise, if you inclined anyway with no speed - plop!

A wedlen turn or railroad turn is not in this definition of carved top of turn as we are discussing. Those crossunder type turns are not what we are discussing. Those can be done slower ('specially railroad turns). But your not talking and I'm not talking about those.
post #28 of 29
the example videos showcase Level 1 and Level 2 skiing. Levels 3 and Level 4 are not shown. Level 3 is internationally recognized. FYI, 5% of the CSIA instructors are level 3 or better. Certainly none were on that video.

Racing is taught through the Canadian Ski Coaches federation -- which FYI, have 3 levels of coaching. 1 - basic skills - train for fun. 2 - train to train. 3 - train to win. Level 1 coaches can teach 7-10 yr olds only. Level 3 can teach up to FIS.

The whole point of CSIA level 1 instruction is to introduce people to ski teaching, and ensure that people at the hill enjoy their experience in some sort of safety. The video examples of level 1 and 2 skiers are clearly non-threatening to those wishing to become instructors.

These are NOT Canadian demo team members.
post #29 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mason
Interesting videos to review:

http://www.snowproab.com/resources/index.htm

ok - tell me if I'm nuts, but looking at all three videos I see the same style of skiing:

1. up-unweighting at turn transition to allow a quick pivot
2. cross under rather than cross over
3. not carving upper part of turns but strong pivot and tail skids along with the up-unweighting at transition

In my own skiing I:

1. Keep the upper body still. I don't bob up and down. My legs extend outward in the turn and then flex in the middle at transition so that my skis stay on the snow and the top of the turn can be carved. By being short in leg length at transition and extending as the turn develops, my body height above the snow stays constant. In the videos there I see what looks to me like the older up-unweighting and strong pivot style of skiing that was needed with non-shaped skis.
2. I cross over my skis as they pass the fall line while I am committing to the next turn, basically continuing down the hill. In these videos the skiers legs are crossing under them rather than there bodies crossing over the skis.

Am I seeing this correctly?
You are not nuts. You are seeing it correctly. I agree with Bige; the skiing shown is designed to show that even intermediate skiers who still have much to learn can be ski instructors. It does a very good job of showing just that; I didn't realize that the ability needed to be a "ski instructor" was so low.

I usually reserve the "cross-under" move as you call it for emergency resetting of edges when charging moguls at the limit of my abilities (I like to see how fast I can get going and give myself less and less time to choose a line (like playing tetris).

I watched closely to see what the edges of their skis were doing. Occasionally, they are able to use the tips, and maybe a little more of their skis to actually cut a little bit of a turn, but seldom use any more of the edge. This has them sometimes pivoting about the front of their base of support. Most times they are simply unweighting and pivoting. Put them in deep snow and they will soon learn to carve.


I agree that they are probably using thier favourite or (only) skis which would be better suited carving larger turns at higher speeds. It is pretty hard to bend a GS ski into a tight turn shape, and sometimes the tail has to be skidded if you are to force it, especially if you don't have high momentum or edge grip (not that anyone was trying to do it on the video).

I totally disagree that carving turns can't be done with an "OLD" preparabolic-shaped skis. Put the old skis up on edge at speed and they will bend and carve just fine.

Pivoting skills are fine, and I'm glad I learned them on that old sloped skating rink with rocks, but carving is sweet. I liken my skiing to sliding down the hill on two two-metre long flexible knives. How I angle and pressure them determines the shape that they squiggle into and where they go. Out east, the ski's are just attached to the edges like a handle to a kife. When I'm lucky enough to see real snow, I can use the entire knife and not just the edge.
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 › Canadian Ski Site BigE posted