EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › PSIA's Skiing Concepts, 2004
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

PSIA's Skiing Concepts, 2004 - Page 2

post #31 of 47
Spam much disski? :

I think that is an excellent document.
post #32 of 47
Can somebody explain "balancing in the future?"
post #33 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurking bear
Can somebody explain "balancing in the future?"
Its really a buzz expression meaning, "Plan ahead to stay in the front seat".
post #34 of 47
Thread Starter 
Not a buzz phrase, but a way of saying something pedestrian in words that make a person think. Balancing in the future is not possible, strictly speaking, but endeavoring to do so will have an extremely positive effect on your skiing.
post #35 of 47
Perhaps it would be a little more accurate to say be in a balanced position when you get there.

For example, if I run and jump onto a cafeteria tray lying on a snow covered slope would I be able to maintain my balance and ride the tray or try to adjust/gain my balance as it begins sliding which means I would most likely land on my butt. The former would be my interpetation of balancing in the future.
post #36 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurking bear
Can somebody explain "balancing in the future?"
In that I've expressed the concept for some time, let me try.

In skiing I suggest that balancing can be reactive (balance in the present) or anticipitory (balance in the future).

The future concept is employed by better skiers who know were the path of the body is going, and how the path of the feet/skis will evolve to support the body from falling down. Skiers who use this concept "allow" their body to free fall (out of balance) in the top of the turn, as their body takes a shorter inside line away from that of the feet, knowing that they will "catch" themselves later in the turn as their skis/feet come around back under them. This release and catch process can produce very fun and exciting experience that is very efficient and can be less tiring than always being "locked in balance" in the present.

Balancing with anticipation for the future also provides for error back to the present, where as error from the present ends up unbalanced in the past (craSH!!). :
post #37 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikewil
Perhaps it would be a little more accurate to say be in a balanced position when you get there.

For example, if I run and jump onto a cafeteria tray lying on a snow covered slope would I be able to maintain my balance and ride the tray or try to adjust/gain my balance as it begins sliding which means I would most likely land on my butt. The former would be my interpetation of balancing in the future.
Harald, Diana, John, and I would like to be there when you try it
post #38 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by lurking bear
Can somebody explain "balancing in the future?"
Lead with the center of mass into a state of imbalance, then let the new turn forces that are eventually created by that CM lead (through the new edge angle) reestablish balance.

BALANCING IN THE PAST: Lead with the edge angle, alter turn forces, then play catch up with the CM to regain balance.

BALANCING IN THE PRESENT: CM, edge angle and turn forces move in harmony. The editome of connection and efficiency
post #39 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Guy
Harald, Diana, John, and I would like to be there when you try it
...and if he can do it on one foot, will he be an "expert tray skier"? I only ask because anyone can be one.
post #40 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcmeister
In that I've expressed the concept for some time, let me try.

In skiing I suggest that balancing can be reactive (balance in the present) or anticipitory (balance in the future).

The future concept is employed by better skiers who know were the path of the body is going, and how the path of the feet/skis will evolve to support the body from falling down. Skiers who use this concept "allow" their body to free fall (out of balance) in the top of the turn, as their body takes a shorter inside line away from that of the feet, knowing that they will "catch" themselves later in the turn as their skis/feet come around back under them. This release and catch process can produce very fun and exciting experience that is very efficient and can be less tiring than always being "locked in balance" in the present.

Balancing with anticipation for the future also provides for error back to the present, where as error from the present ends up unbalanced in the past (craSH!!). :
Arc, hate to disagree with you but from an eastern martial perspective, (you seem to like that) there is a big difference between rsponding to an opponent and anticipating what our opponent will do. Maintaining our balance in the present is the best way to be able to respond anything external. As soon as we anticipate we lose our ability to respond, and we lose our root. \to constantly understand and maintain the relationship between our root and our centerland (CoM) in the present is the best way to maintain it into the future. Skiing is just lke push hands to me. The instant I anticipate exactly what I may need in the future is to exspose myself to out side influence.

The instant I move for an anticipation of the future needs then I give up the present. The instant I give up my balance for future balance in skiing then i have given up control of my balance in the present. This is my personal perspective, but find that it does not preclude shapeing the future, but that shaping the future continualy starts from maintinaing my balance and root in the present. Skiing and Tai chi chaun both continually reinforce this for me.

For me balancing in the present is responing, while balancing in the past is reactive and balancing in the future is anticipated recovery at best and reactive at the worst. Later, RicB.
post #41 of 47
RicB that is exactly the way I feel. I think of stance maintenance in the present as the anticipatory move to blance in the future. Giving up balance now for balance in the future would likely shut down active feet momentarily.
post #42 of 47
RicB and Pierre, as indicated in my above post I agree with your preference for balancing in the present. In linked, arc to arc, steered or carved turns stiving to maintain an optimal CM to feet relationship provides the best platform for controlling and reacting to thngs in the future.

Where I will agree with Arc's recognition of balancing in the future is in turns with a pivoted entry. Here, the dynamic nature of the pivot results in a loss of a connection to the ground, thus the progressive, simultaneous application of new edge angles, turn forces and CM positions can't be executed. The CM is tossed into the new turn, and once the ground connection is reestablished new turn forces spring to life and thrust us back into a state of force equilibrium.

There's a place for both.

Now, does anyone think there are situations that call for balancing in the past as the prefered tactic?
post #43 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
Now, does anyone think there are situations that call for balancing in the past as the prefered tactic?
Yes with my inlaws.
post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
RicB and Pierre, as indicated in my above post I agree with your preference for balancing in the present. In linked, arc to arc, steered or carved turns stiving to maintain an optimal CM to feet relationship provides the best platform for controlling and reacting to thngs in the future.

Where I will agree with Arc's recognition of balancing in the future is in turns with a pivoted entry. Here, the dynamic nature of the pivot results in a loss of a connection to the ground, thus the progressive, simultaneous application of new edge angles, turn forces and CM positions can't be executed. The CM is tossed into the new turn, and once the ground connection is reestablished new turn forces spring to life and thrust us back into a state of force equilibrium.

There's a place for both.

Now, does anyone think there are situations that call for balancing in the past as the prefered tactic?
Thankyou Rick.... you have just explained for me why I find it so very difficult to learn to initiate turns with a pivot......
post #45 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick
RicB and Pierre, as indicated in my above post I agree with your preference for balancing in the present. In linked, arc to arc, steered or carved turns stiving to maintain an optimal CM to feet relationship provides the best platform for controlling and reacting to thngs in the future.

Where I will agree with Arc's recognition of balancing in the future is in turns with a pivoted entry. Here, the dynamic nature of the pivot results in a loss of a connection to the ground, thus the progressive, simultaneous application of new edge angles, turn forces and CM positions can't be executed. The CM is tossed into the new turn, and once the ground connection is reestablished new turn forces spring to life and thrust us back into a state of force equilibrium.

There's a place for both.

Now, does anyone think there are situations that call for balancing in the past as the prefered tactic?

So Rick are you saying that to balance we need to have an edge engaged? I find that I can feel balanced on a pivoting ski if I keep my center over my feet, and in equilibrium with the forces, as long as the ski is in contact with the snow. Now if the pivot moves the ski away from the balance line required then I lose this. I can feel as balanced in a pivot slip as I do in a carve. I just need to balance my center and forces over the pivot point. Even in a pivot slip there is a slow move from one set of edges to the others, and contiuos ski snow interaction. So I don't know? One thing is for sure, for every rule there is an exception.

Balancing in the past? Do you mean moving the feet ahead of the center, or working the tails of the skis? Later, RicB.
post #46 of 47
Ric, Rick,

Do we have to be in contact with the ground to be balanced? A skier can take air and be in perfect balance leaving the ground and upon reconnecting with the ground. What do we call the state they maintain while in the air?

yd
post #47 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by ydnar
Ric, Rick,

Do we have to be in contact with the ground to be balanced? A skier can take air and be in perfect balance leaving the ground and upon reconnecting with the ground. What do we call the state they maintain while in the air?

yd
DavidM once told the physiological name for this state, but I can't remember it. In this case I think we are leveraging our momentum and mass for our balancing actions and they are temporary at best and have no ability to control our direction (obviously), only on how we reconnect. One of my weak points. Air time. Or maybe it is just wisdom. Later, RicB.
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 › PSIA's Skiing Concepts, 2004