or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Ski Instruction & Coaching › 50-50 take off and Dynamic SR turns
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

50-50 take off and Dynamic SR turns

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
This weekend was an intersting learning experience.

Friday the snow conditions were medium firm early in the morning at SugarBowl. I had a private lesson scheduled for 10:00 so I decided to go out and warm up a little and play with this 50-50 thing some more. One of the skiing tasks at LIII is Dynamic short radius turns. According to the PSIA national Requirements we are supposed to be able to leave 2 cleanly scribed arcs thoughout the turn.

And so I started on a Green-blue flat area nice and slow and started to RRtrack 2 nice arcs in the snow. I slowly shortened up the turns continuing to try to leave 2 arc's in the snow. Once I had a nice rhythm going I took the turns right onto a steep pitch (Lower McTavish for those of you who know SugarBowl)
I continued down to the bottom picking up quite a bit of speed but still felt like for the most part I was carving down the hill. I was working on getting a high edge angle early in the turn and could tell that some skidding was happening but I didn't think too much about it.

I'm skiing on 160CM Salomon 10.3V skis with the SL race plate (rated 13M Radius) I'm guessing I was making turns in about 1.5 Groomer tracks wide so the Radius I was trying to make were probably about 4-5M (considerably shorter than the natural arc of this ski) and from what I understand from my exam experience last year, would be about what is expected from me in a LIII exam.

The turns felt pretty good and there was some skidding but I expected this. As I went around and took another lap, I checked out my tracks and I could not see the "2 arcs" in the snow through the whole turn.

What I found were 2 clean tracks from about the fall line moving to the transition, From the transition to the initiation of the next turn was a visibly flat ski to the up hill ski starting to edge. About there I lose sight of any real track in the snow (almost like a skidded turn but it was "round") out to the fall line. Then entering the fall line one very deep track (outside ski) and the inside ski sometimes had a clean track other times it was visibly skidded a little but the track was there slowly getting cleaner towards the bottom of the turn until the next transition.

On the easy flats leading up to the steeps there were 2 clean arcs (most of the time) through out the whole turn.

I went back 3 times and tried again and again never able to get 2 clean arcs.

Was I doing something wrong I thought to my self. I better run this by our SSD and see if I am missing something but I am coming to the conclusion that physics will not allow this 2 arc thing to happen at these high speeds.

Jump ahead to Saturday morning and I get a chance to ask my SSD. He is chatting with another of our trainers about an "Ah Ha" he just had so I just listen in for a while. The conclusion....

At the top end of skiing (very strong high speed Dynamic turns on steeps) The 2 rail 50-50 turn can't and will not happen. (Pure physics) 2 Clean arc's in the snow is not a realistic goal at the very high speeds. What I was seeing on the snow after my playing with it is what will happen. Does this change our thinking about skiing and demos? The 2 rail task makes sense on certain types of terrain but it does not work all over the mountain. Especially at those high speeds with dynamic turns.


What are your thoughts on this?
post #2 of 48
Hi dchan,
I'd suggest that pure carved twin arc turn entries should be functionally avaliable anywhere you would rationally seek to apply them and can safely handle the resultant speed they produce. SG/DH racers routinely do this on steep icy terrain at speeds well beyond the scope of what most non-racers would ever have to cope with.

How steep and how fast do you find this qualification kicks in for you? I encourage you to not accept some mythological limitation and continue to press your skills to higher levels of accuracy and precision. I wish we could get on snow together so I could lead you down that path.

In any realistically functional application the limitation would most likely be with the skier's transition skills. If as your description details, you can twin arc the turn bottom, you should be able to twin arc the the top where the forces are somewhat offsetting and it is actually easier do.

When reading your tracks, look to see if there is a double big-toe edges overlap in your transitions? Your description leads me to suspect that your "order of movement" is a BT-BT sequence in steep/high speed situations. This often becomes predominant at speed, or on steeps, due to holding of the outside leg too stiff, too long leading into the turn transition having over directed the CM across the slope. This then invites a hard big-toe initiation to re-direct the CM back toward the inside of the next turn, unloading and disconnecting the inside ski, placing a higher level demand on balancing the inside/outside foot/leg coordination and ski engagment required to create a twin arcs entry.

I'd suggest exploring an earlier release of the CM by softening, or even retracting, the outside leg prior to transition. Make sure the edge change trigger is to roll the old outside/new inside foot completely over, rather than going for the new outside big-toe first. With a smooth release of the CM across the feet, a balanced carving twin arc turn entry should be achievable.

Go for the higher skill level of puzzle solving!
Seek and you shall find!
Arc
post #3 of 48
Archmeister, I would very much like to ski with you and for you to teach me how to do something I consider close to impossible. Carve 50/50 RR on all sorts of terrain.

dchan, in my thread earlier this season on people that think they carve but they dont I addressed this exact issue you are now bringing up. Glad you do, because there are folks like Archmeister and other experts who can carve anywere but most of us cannot. And most of us cannot even do it on medium steap terrain although we think we can. As I stated then having someone like me ski behind you and film your hipps, knees, skis and RR on video as you blaze down on a morning fresh, hard and smooth surface would give the answere to many of your questions. The transition archmeister is talking about shows beautifully on video when you watch it frame by frame. Also how both of your skis carve and how the inside ski many times skidds just a little.
post #4 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by dchan
I'm skiing on 160CM Salomon 10.3V skis with the SL race plate (rated 13M Radius) I'm guessing I was making turns in about 1.5 Groomer tracks wide so the Radius I was trying to make were probably about 4-5M (considerably shorter than the natural arc of this ski)
I think you just answered the question in a manner that Good Will Hunting can understand.
post #5 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcmeister
Hi dchan,
I'd suggest that pure carved twin arc turn entries should be functionally avaliable anywhere you would rationally seek to apply them and can safely handle the resultant speed they produce. SG/DH racers routinely do this on steep icy terrain at speeds well beyond the scope of what most non-racers would ever have to cope with.
Sure, but DChan is talking about a 4-5 M turn. I don't think anyone can do this unless they are on snowlerblades.
post #6 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic
Sure, but DChan is talking about a 4-5 M turn. I don't think anyone can do this unless they are on snowlerblades.
Take a look at a world cup slalom course after they are done. Two separate round ruts. Of course, even they don't do it all the time--see thread on ugly turns last week.
post #7 of 48
One way I inspect my own transition in carving is to just look at my own tracks. Early morning runs are usefull here. What I want to see is both skis being flat at the same time for the same distance, which if done quickly will not be much longer than a ski length. What I feel is a foot and leg movement, feet tipping and the thighs rotating simultaneously, changing ski edges on both skis quickly. If I do this as I release pressure then the release is quick and smooth to the new edges and the body does not move too quickly lateraly into the turn.

Can it be done everywhere? I can't and don't want to try in some places, though we did attempt to do some carving in a steep bump run (out of sight) in a clinnic the other day. results where mixed in our group, with the clinician actully airing it in the transition. I was more comfortable slowing down the transition some and then quickly working skis onto a hard edge. High speed carves in steep rutty bumps will test your stance, balance, and range of motion of your legs.

Carving requires needed skills and is fun in the appropiate terrain but really isn't approriate in alot of terrain we have on our mountain. I have found with my Metron B5s that I am more comfortable pushing my own comfort zone than I was on previous longer length and longer radius skis.

We had a regional race at Bridger two weeks ago. Colleges from all over the rocky mountain west. It was interesting to see these college racers not carving down to the start. It drew my attention. A few did, but most would simply make skidded turns down the winch groomed deer park face (around 35 degrees I have heard). The race course runs between 20 to 30 degrees and even when they were off to the side of the course, most carved on this terrain. Later, RicB.
post #8 of 48
SL and GS runs are set so that you cannot carve through them from start to finnish. Bode said so himself, max a couple of turns on steaper terrain but usually just one. I skied a 45deg the other day and I picked up considerable speed just going past the fall line. The guys wiping out slid all the way down to the bottom. Not possible to carve there. Not possible to carve in big mogules eather or in powder (except if you float). Carving is good for sertain terrain but not for everything.

dchan, you cannot carve 4m radius on the 13m 3v salomons you have. 11m maybe! I tried them a few days ago in the FIS length and they were pritty stiff.
post #9 of 48
Thread Starter 
Interesting comments everyone.

Arc,

You have skied with me a little and I suspect my skiing has improved a great deal since the last time we skied together. I'm not doubting that RR track turns are possible on all terrain at certain speeds however. And in the context of using the skis to get on rail and really ride them, I know I can make these turns most of the time at some pretty fast speeds. Part of my frustration is in the tasks and demos for LIII as well as the description in the PSIA Alpine movements the suggest that you should be able to do these RR tracks while making SR turns.

My problem with this is, in order to tighten up the radius of a turn past the "physical limitation" of a ski, you only have a few choices. One a higher edge angle, however there are limits to this, Shorter skis with more side cut, some skid and steering, or physically leaving the snow and rotating the skis.. Except for the little bit more of a tighter radius created by a higher edge angle the other options would seem to suggest that 2 clean arc's in the snow would not truly possible.

So, do we need to revise the PSIA requirement in the tasks. Do the PSIA examiners take this into account and mainly look for the way the skis interact with the snow rather than the tracks left behind in the snow.

A note about Bode and Benjamin: If you watch a frame by frame video of their skiing, Why the A Frame for a very short time? and if you take a very good look at their tracks. I suggest that although they probably have both skis working more of the time than us mere mortals, they ride their skis flat and are more sequencial in their movements than PSIA asks us to show our guests during our demos. Does that make their skiing wrong?

DC
post #10 of 48
dchan:

I certainly wouldn't argue that a 5m pure carved turn on a 13m ski *can't* be done, but I would bet my season pass at Jackson Hole that no more than five skiers out of a thousand on any given hill could link four of those turns together successively on moderately steep, fairly hard snow.

I think what you're aspiring to do is one of the most difficult skills there is on skis. It takes power, speed, agility, balance, reflexes, and one heck of a lot of practice.

I don't know anything about certification requirements or testing, but it would be very interesting to see if your *examiner* could leave the kind of tracks you believe are required.

This is kind of a pet subject for me because I'm trying hard to learn to carve better. I pay a lot of attention to carving and watch skiers and tracks all the time, and I ski at a hill that is known to have some pretty good skiers. Bottom line; I see almost no one - Level III's included - making pure, round, carved, twin-track, ultra-short radius turns on this hill. I see *lots* of good skiers making good carved turns in the medium to long radii, but I almost never see linked, short-radius, double trenches on hard, steeper slopes.

There are four different skiers here at Jackson Hole whom I have watched make that kind of turn, and that's it. All of them were ski team members. I've never seen any of our instructors, examiners included, make the kind of turn you're describing.

Bob
post #11 of 48
Good topic DC, as there's so much misconception out there about this. I'll address some of the issues.

>> Racers making high edge angle turns rarely carve both skis. This is easy to see. Look at a frontal view of a WC shot of the apex of a high edge turn. If you don't see the inside shin angle (angle between snow and shin) at least as small as the outside shin angle then the inside ski is not carving,,, it cant be or the skis would quickly cross.

Hint on seeing shin angles; look at the distance from knee to snow. Closer it is to the snow, the smaller the angle. The carving ski is identified by the shin with the smaller angle.

Also note, some might find it easier to understand by measuring shin angles between vertical and the shin. It may be somewhat easier this way because a higher edge angle results in a bigger shin angle. I don't becuase I like to focus attention on amount of space between the shin and the snow,,, just easier to see,,, but as long as you explain the nature of your reference to your audience you can do it either way.

>> Why don't racers employ parallel shin angles? Simple.... At high edge angles it requires just too much contortion of the inside leg to achieve. This is especially true when a bit of outside knee angulation is added for balance, or to increased edge angle without having to drag the hip on the snow.

This is WHY, DC, you see A-framed lower legs. Look close and there's almost always a degree of A-frame present.

>> More evidence the inside ski is not on as high an edge angle; look at ski bend. Typically the inside ski is bent less. On hard snow there's a direct correlation between edge angle and ski bend; the bigger the angle, the bigger the bend.

>> And still more evidence. Compare the directional orientation of the inside and outside skis. Quite often you'll notice some convergence of the skis being displayed. Obviously the inside ski cannot be carving, or crossing would be unavoidable. What's happening here is the use of inside leg tension to keep the inside ski in directional harmony with the carving outside ski.

Inside leg tension is a way of steering the inside ski without having to actively twist the foot. I explained it in a previous thread. Convergence of the skis is common when using inside leg tension. The inside ski is being pulled through the turn via the tension in the inside leg, but the force the tension is trying to overcome tends to twist the inside leg/foot to the outside of the arc, up to a point in which the inside leg tension neutralizes that twist and drives the ski through the turn.

>> 50-50 is not seen much in high edge WC turns. That much pressure diminishes effectivnesss of inside leg tension, and over taxes the highly flexed inside leg (straight is strong, bent is weak).

>> Look at the amount of snow flying off each ski in WC shots to identify pressure distribution.

>> Also, observe the amount of angulation at the hip to determine pressure distribution. Sometimes this to is hard to identify if you don't understand the mechanics of for pelvic counter.

>> Also, it's commonly understood accross the racing landscape that the outside ski is the dominant pressure bearer. In racing circles a left turn is commonly refered to as a right footed turn, and a right turn is called a left footed turn.

DC, hope this helps. One thing though; in your description of your turn initiations it sounds as though your tracks are indicating a less than clean entry. Even with the things I've said about the nature of high edge angle turns, clean initiations still should be a very achievable option. Sounds like you may be adding a minor pivot or steer prior to engaging the new turn. Work on slowing down the roll so you feel the edge go from edged, to neutral, to edged again with absolutely no twisting of the foot. Then just increase the tempo without losing that feel.
post #12 of 48
dchan: I think the "G" forces one has to manage along with the extremely fast muscle movements in the type of turns you describe limit the amount of skiers who can physically do that short radius RR track pure arc skiing. Then there is the pucker factor (fear) as I refer to it. I have attempted those type of turns on steep hardpack groomed runs ,after about 4-6 turns I'm going too fast for my comfort level. On true intermediate runs that are wide open with no traffic I can let them run mostly medium radius to smaller radius turns but I'm really hauling butt and I want alot of room to let them run. Try working up to the level you want by going as many pure arcs as you can in the short radius turns then shut it down when you get the 1st skid. Stop ,regroup then try to go one turn more the next time and so on.
post #13 of 48
Bob Peters, well spoken, Ill second that anytime. I just got home from a week of carving in Norway on my new Head SL RD 161cm r11.5 boards. My last years skis were the shop model iSL with an r of 14. Huge difference. With last years skis I had no problem laying down nice RR but this year was different. Much harder. Inside ski was much more difficult to handle. Skiing itself wasent. Speed was faster and ice absolutely no problem but inside ski stearing and edging much more sensetive. The more I pushed the skis into tighter carved turns the more I had to put weight on the outside ski wich resulted in bigger turn radius difference between inside and outside ski at the same time as the radius got smaller. We all know what that means. Some may say that I should have put more pressure on the inside ski but in that case there should have been more pressure on the inside ski than on the outside ski, right!!!

A-frame, whats wrong with that??!! If you are carving on a GS skis on flat slope keeping your knees apart and skis equally edged is a simple task. In fact almost any technique works here. Its when we go to steaper terrain not to talk about racing skiing that certain things work and certain things dont. The A-frame for instance is automatic in many GS turns since you have the inside ski knee almost touching your jaws or at least in your arm pit. Since skis are apart and outside ski knee needs to go as faar in as needed to keep skis at desired edge angle A-frame is a matural result. Same as inside ski lead. Same as outside ski pressure. Same as upper body turned slightly downhill. Same as hips forced way into the turn. Same as outside leg as straight as possible. etc... All these are considered wrong by some of uss.

Also, if you watch SL racing in most turns there is a short inside ski tip lift at the transition. This is to give the outside ski a better grip and align the skis a fraction of a second later so that they will not run together or hinder each other in some weard unexpected way. Also to give the outside ski free space to carve its own optimal turn with optimal stearing and gripp. If you know what you are looking for its easy to spot like right here: http://www.youcanski.com/english/coa...videoclips.htm Slalom/Paerson/clip2. She is lifting her inside ski every turn in this clip. Most visually on the first and the last one. Check out all the other clipps as well. They are wery good.

BTW, there is a canadian woman ski racer named Brigitte Action that all the coaches and the WC skiiers over here rawe about. She is supposed to have the perfect technique. No A-frame. Knees wide apart.
post #14 of 48
Rick and Snowbowler, good posts absolutely true.
post #15 of 48
Keep the physics in mind here, too, team. The forces acting on a skier on steep terrain are the same, but at different magnitudes, than those acting on a skier on shallower terrain. The key components of interest to this particular conversation are gravity and velocity. On steeper terrain, the vector of gravity doesn't pull the skier as much towards the snow as on shallower terrain. As a result, velocity and the resultant centrifugal forces have to be built up so that the new edges are creating a corresponding centripetal force. On steep terrain, this isn't possible early in the turn. Draw a force diagram and you'll see this. The only way to get the forces to align is to increase speed. But, at some point, you can't increase speed far enough to overcome the gravitational force necessary to get the skis on their new edges earlier in the turn.
post #16 of 48
Thread Starter 
Rick/fastman

Your post only strengthen's my revelation this weekend. It's not me, It's just what happens. I know my tracks are not at the place I want them to be and I know I can fix the initation. I have done it in the past and I know what a great turn feels like. You make one and "WOW!" I know how to reproduce the turn but just can't do it every time (need more practice).

When I make a clean entry into a turn I see 2 evenly edged tracks as I come across the fall line and the inside track generally fades to almost nothing in about 1/8 of the turn. As I let the skis drift away from me and I continue to move inside the turn, the outside ski begins to load up. While managing this pressure the inside ski track seems to wipe off the outside ski's track. As I get closer to the bottom of the turn and I'm trying to manage the pressure (less pressure on outside and supporting more with the inside ski, and start moving to the inside ski (to become the new outside ski) the 2 tracks become visible again.

DC
post #17 of 48
Dchan, are you saying that because the inside ski cannot achieve the same edge angle and pressure that the inside ski will leave no track or a highly skidded track?

Rick, how about dual femur rotation? If the outside hip is rotating around the stance leg then doesn't the inside leg want to mirror the outside leg? Is this the inside leg tension you speak of?

From a lift riders perspective, when watching good carvers who can change radius of their turns and achieve everything from shortish radius to long radius carves, the thighs moving in unison in rotation into the turn exists in all of them. Like windshield wipers on a windshield. Even when the angles get high enough to force some a-framing the inside thigh is still rotating into the turn.

My guess is that this may be wanted less in a race than in recreational carving, as the line wanted is not round arc to round arc. The question then is do we want to compare the mechanics of round arc to arc turns to race course turns where the skier is trying to ski the straightest line and turn the least? Don't the applied mechanics change some as the intent changes?

Even with outside ski dominance I still leave a carved track with my inside ski. When my inside track disapears or smears, then I need to be concerned about my technique. Later, RicB.
post #18 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
Dchan, are you saying that because the inside ski cannot achieve the same edge angle and pressure that the inside ski will leave no track or a highly skidded track?

Even with outside ski dominance I still leave a carved track with my inside ski. When my inside track disapears or smears, then I need to be concerned about my technique. Later, RicB.
At the much higher speeds when the pressure really moves to the outside ski, there would be more skidding as you steer the inside ski with your femur to keep the skis from crossing. Take this into a turn that must be skidded some in order to make the turn that much smaller than the radius of the "natural arc" of the ski and ....

I know I can get better but where does the "perfect" arc-arc to arc-arc turn become near impossible. and how do we tell if have begun to hit that wall?
post #19 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by dchan
At the much higher speeds when the pressure really moves to the outside ski, there would be more skidding as you steer the inside ski with your femur to keep the skis from crossing. Take this into a turn that must be skidded some in order to make the turn that much smaller than the radius of the "natural arc" of the ski and ....

I know I can get better but where does the "perfect" arc-arc to arc-arc turn become near impossible. and how do we tell if have begun to hit that wall?
What I see and feel in my own skiing is that when I get to the poiint that my inside ski is maxed out and needs to skid my outside is also maxed and needs to skid.

Inside foot and leg steering can be overdone, giving too much attention and improtance to it, causing it to skid into the turn. Focus on both femurs rotating into the turn and it will keep both skis on the same page. These words came out of Nick Herrins (dteam) mouth yesterday afternoon in a clinic. They jibe wiht what I feel in my own skiing. Later, RicB.
post #20 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh
Keep the physics in mind here, too, team. The forces acting on a skier on steep terrain are the same, but at different magnitudes, than those acting on a skier on shallower terrain. The key components of interest to this particular conversation are gravity and velocity. On steeper terrain, the vector of gravity doesn't pull the skier as much towards the snow as on shallower terrain. As a result, velocity and the resultant centrifugal forces have to be built up so that the new edges are creating a corresponding centripetal force. On steep terrain, this isn't possible early in the turn. Draw a force diagram and you'll see this. The only way to get the forces to align is to increase speed. But, at some point, you can't increase speed far enough to overcome the gravitational force necessary to get the skis on their new edges earlier in the turn.
If you were able to achieve a pure carved turn, then with no braking via skidding, speed control would become harder and harder until you reached either terminal velocity or the limitations of edge grip. My mental model of pure carved turns is that speed control comes from the reduction in the average gradient of the carved line. If you carve perfect 1/2 circles in each 1/2 turn, the your line will be approximately 1.5 times longer than going straight down. So on 30 degree slope perfect half circle carved turns would reduce your effective gradient to about 20 degrees. At this gradient you would eventually be skiing at around WC downhill pace. The textbook answer would be to decrease the average gradient yet further by completing your turns uphill. This may well be possible on a steep pitch but I have not seen anyone do it.
post #21 of 48
Simple fact is that the outside ski travels on a larger radius arc than the inside ski through any given arc. In a car you have a diff to allow the wheels to travel at diferent speeds so they can describe diferent sized arcs.
If you want to carve both skis at speed on parallel but different sized arcs the inside ski would have to be tipped more and pressured more to bend it into the tighter arc hence more weight on the inside ski not 50/50 and not a good way to make an efient turn. Simple physics shows that this is not possible.The best skiers in the world don't do this. So why should you?
post #22 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
Rick, how about dual femur rotation? If the outside hip is rotating around the stance leg then doesn't the inside leg want to mirror the outside leg? Is this the inside leg tension you speak of?
Ric, I like how you describe the rotation as the hip rotating around the leg (femur). In carving the mechanics of the ski creates the direction change and the leg just stands stable on top of the turning ski. Any rotation (including counter) that occurs at the hip/femur joint takes place just as you describe.

Now,,,, should there be rotational symmetry between the inside and outside legs/hips during that self introduced/allowed rotation you describe? You bet, I totally endorse that. But thats not the tension I speak of. The tension I'm describing here is the tension created in the muscles of the inside hip/femur joint that strive to keep the rotation of the inside leg in harmony with the outside leg when the outside leg is carving and the inside is not.

When the outside ski is carving the mechanics of the ski create direction change. If the inside ski is not on as high an edge as the outside ski then if left on there own the direction changes will not match, and therefor neither will the femur rotations in the hips. To keep them in harmony a force must be introduced to overcome the natural tendancy of the inside ski to track straighter. I'm suggesting tension in the hip/femur joint is the mechanism most efficient to achieve this. This is the tension I'm attempting to describe.

Now don't ask me to describe the muscular menagerie that goes into allowing the inside leg to rotate in unison with the outside leg, while at the same time restricting (through tension) the undesired rotation resulting from unequal edge angles. I'll just attribute it to the "body genius" Arc refers to often. Typically this is something we do unconciously, most are not even aware they're doing it, and if they ever tried to think about all the individual elements required to accomplish it they'd probably fall down.
post #23 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
From a lift riders perspective, when watching good carvers who can change radius of their turns and achieve everything from shortish radius to long radius carves, the thighs moving in unison in rotation into the turn exists in all of them. Like windshield wipers on a windshield. Even when the angles get high enough to force some a-framing the inside thigh is still rotating into the turn.
Great, Ric, I love your windshield wiper on the windshield analogy,,,, perfect! And yes, even with uneven edge angles, and some A-framing, rotational symmetry is the goal because femur rotational symmetry equates to ski directional symmetry.

The only thing I would clarify here is the difference between what appears to the observer and what is really taking place. What really occuring here is not femur rotation. When carving the ski is turning and the leg is stable on top of the ski. What rotation occurs at the hip is that of the hip being forced or allowed to rotate around the stable leg.

Steering is a different animal. Here, the femurs are rotated within a stable hip, to change the direction the skis point.



Quote:
My guess is that this may be wanted less in a race than in recreational carving, as the line wanted is not round arc to round arc. The question then is do we want to compare the mechanics of round arc to arc turns to race course turns where the skier is trying to ski the straightest line and turn the least? Don't the applied mechanics change some as the intent changes?
Yes, we must pick and choose what we strive to emulate in modern SL and GS technique, as I said before in my "back to ugly" thread. There's so much pivoting going on now it's hard to find the clean arc to arc skiing that most recreational skiers strive for.

But,,, after the pivots, carving is still the goal, and what carving takes place there is carving in the highest form and contains all the elements of efficient technique we all should strive to copy. All the things we speak of here in regard to carving and the most efficient relationships between inside and outside skis and legs are all there for us to behold and study.


Quote:
Even with outside ski dominance I still leave a carved track with my inside ski. When my inside track disapears or smears, then I need to be concerned about my technique. Later, RicB.
I Agree, Ric. The bigger the "smear" the bigger the divergence in inside and outside ski edge angles, the greater resistance to forward travel created by the inside ski, and the bigger tax on the muscles to keep the skis tracking in the same direction.

This is why striving for lower leg symmetry is important. It's just that it's not always practical. In typical skiing situations the amount of steering in the inside leg (through tension) is so miniscule it's not apparent in the track, to the casual observer, or to the sensory system of the skier.
post #24 of 48
Thread Starter 
So I'm not so far off?

I know I need to refine my skills more but just maybe it's not all my lousy skiing.
post #25 of 48
No, DC, so far off you're not. Sometimes conventional wisdom can be taken to extremes,,, legitimate themes can be run with beyond reality. In this case equal edge angles and pressure is that wisdom/theme. In these instances it's the unique mind that can recognize the reality beyond the mantra. Nice job, DC.
post #26 of 48
rick - this "inside leg tension" is that why the staatliche I ski with keeps telling me to "activate" this muscle before you turn - he then points at his inner thigh
post #27 of 48
Yikes! Reading this thread makes me wonder whether I want to learn to ski better or just get a snowboard. It reminds me of looking at my wife's old official figure skating manual with its diagrams of every single stroke in a two-minute dance, complete with incomprehensible notations.
post #28 of 48
Rick, I'm not gonna attempt to break down the muscles in your functional tension either. I do think however that one of the reasons that many don't achieve this is that they overdrive the hips into counter too early in the turn. They try to get into the position they ski into at the end of the turn right at the beggining of the turn. this moves the inside ski and foot too far forward and reduces the weight on it too much and because the range of motion that allows the outside hip to rotate around the outside leg is used up the result is that the inside leg is oversteered, and the hips drop back and in rather than moving lateraly.

It is in this diretion that I like your use of "Drive the inside hip". To me this means that we need continuos progressive movement of the inside hip that serves the primary relationship of the core to our outside leg and ski. This creates a strong inside half that developes as the turn developes not to soon and not too late. This may be more obvious in a carved turned where the skis anchor, but I think it is also required in a skidded turn where the core is the anchor. Later, RicB.
post #29 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
rick - this "inside leg tension" is that why the staatliche I ski with keeps telling me to "activate" this muscle before you turn - he then points at his inner thigh
That's part of it Disski. The role of the inside leg is crucial,,, it drives and dictates the turn,,, it must be activated.

The driving of the inside leg and hip forward and inside:

- Negates the counter of the prior turn

- Returns the CM to a forward position for the initiation of the new turn

- Establishes the early stage counter for the new turn

- Pulls the outside leg into inclination

- Opens the gate to maximum inclination

- Promotes rotational femur alignment.

The inside leg tension I spoke of is a rotational resistance tension that keeps the inside foot in directional semi-harmony with the outside foot when carving alone cannot. That too (as do all the above) requires the inside leg tension your staatliche consistently advocates.
post #30 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by RicB
Rick, I'm not gonna attempt to break down the muscles in your functional tension either. I do think however that one of the reasons that many don't achieve this is that they overdrive the hips into counter too early in the turn. They try to get into the position they ski into at the end of the turn right at the beggining of the turn. this moves the inside ski and foot too far forward and reduces the weight on it too much and because the range of motion that allows the outside hip to rotate around the outside leg is used up the result is that the inside leg is oversteered, and the hips drop back and in rather than moving lateraly.

It is in this diretion that I like your use of "Drive the inside hip". To me this means that we need continuos progressive movement of the inside hip that serves the primary relationship of the core to our outside leg and ski. This creates a strong inside half that developes as the turn developes not to soon and not too late. This may be more obvious in a carved turned where the skis anchor, but I think it is also required in a skidded turn where the core is the anchor. Later, RicB.
I agree Ric. The driving should be both forward and in, just as you point out, and it should be applied in a functional manner. All the negative outcomes of the misapplications you identify are spot on.

The most distinguishable forward aspect of the drive occurs during the transition. Here, the inside hip must be rapidly driven forward to quickly eliminate the maxed out counter of the prior turn, and then establish the initial functional counter for the new turn. That constitutes a big pelvic rotational swing in a very small time frame.

From that point (post transition) on, the forward aspect of the drive becomes more subdued, continuing on in a more subtle fashion, and only as mandated by the progressive application of higher edge angles as the turn proceeds. In this post transition phase of the turn the lateral aspect of the driving of the inside hip assumes the more dominant role.

Viewed on a time line, lateral inside hip driving (from maximum inclination on one side to maximum inclination on the other) would display relative intensity consistency, where as forward driving of the inside hip measured on the same time line would be seen as more front end loaded.

Agree Ric?
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 › 50-50 take off and Dynamic SR turns